Heier v. Panama Transport Co.

Second Circuit

Heier v. Panama Transport Co.

172 F.2d 355, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2712

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 31, 1949·No. No. 140, Docket 21192·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

Ordinarily the trial judge has discretion to permit the filing of later claims in an admiralty proceeding, at least as long as the fund has not been entirely distributed or a final decree entered. Meyer v. New England Fish Co., 9 Cir., 136 F.2d 315; Petition of Chester A. Poling, Inc., D.C.E.D.N.Y., 51 F.Supp. 375.

Since the appellants are Norwegian seamen, uninformed about oür laws and procedures, who apparently were under the mistaken impression that their claims had been filed, leave to file the claims should have been granted, subject to the condition, to which their attorney agreed, that it [356] would in no way prejudice any claimant who filed his claim within the prescribed time.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

Ordinarily the trial judge has discretion to permit the filing of later claims in an admiralty proceeding, at least as long as the fund has not been entirely distributed or a final decree entered. Meyer v. New England Fish Co., 9 Cir., 136 F.2d 315; Petition of Chester A. Poling, Inc., D.C.E.D.N.Y., 51 F.Supp. 375.

Since the appellants are Norwegian seamen, uninformed about oür laws and procedures, who apparently were under the mistaken impression that their claims had been filed, leave to file the claims should have been granted, subject to the condition, to which their attorney agreed, that it [356] would in no way prejudice any claimant who filed his claim within the prescribed time.

Reversed.

Heier v. Panama Transport Co., 172 F.2d 355, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2712 (2d Cir. 1949).

Pincite

172 F.2d 355 (Heier v. Panama Transport Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related