Holmes v. Bradshaw

D. Vermont

Holmes v. Bradshaw

12 F. Cas. 402

DecidedJuly 1, 1876

StatusPublished

This text of 12 F. Cas. 402 (Holmes v. Bradshaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Holmes v. Bradshaw, 12 F. Cas. 402 (D. Vt. 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

[In respect to the time for the payment of wages to the crew of a vessel upon arrival in port, it was held that 15 days were a proper allowance for the discharge of the cargo, by analogy to the time allowed under the collection act of 1799, c. 128 (Bior. & D. Laws; 1 Stat. 627, c. 22), and that the 10 days ordinarily began to run from the period when the cargo actually was or might be discharged, and that the voyage was then properly ended; but in cases where the crew were discharged upon arrival in port, and were not retained for the purpose of discharging the cargo (which is a common practice), the Í0 days should begin to run from the time of the discharge of the crew. The day of discharge is not to be included in the 10.]

[Before Davis, District Judge. Cited in The Mary, Case No. 9,191; 2 Pars. Shipp. & Adm. 366; and in Abb. Shipp. 635, note, — to the points as stated above. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]

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

[In respect to the time for the payment of wages to the crew of a vessel upon arrival in port, it was held that 15 days were a proper allowance for the discharge of the cargo, by analogy to the time allowed under the collection act of 1799, c. 128 (Bior. & D. Laws; 1 Stat. 627, c. 22), and that the 10 days ordinarily began to run from the period when the cargo actually was or might be discharged, and that the voyage was then properly ended; but in cases where the crew were discharged upon arrival in port, and were not retained for the purpose of discharging the cargo (which is a common practice), the Í0 days should begin to run from the time of the discharge of the crew. The day of discharge is not to be included in the 10.]

[Before Davis, District Judge. Cited in The Mary, Case No. 9,191; 2 Pars. Shipp. & Adm. 366; and in Abb. Shipp. 635, note, — to the points as stated above. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 F. Cas. 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-bradshaw-vtd-1876.