Lowery v. Hudson River Day Line

249 F.2d 656
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedNovember 29, 1957
Docket24070
StatusPublished

This text of 249 F.2d 656 (Lowery v. Hudson River Day Line) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lowery v. Hudson River Day Line, 249 F.2d 656 (2d Cir. 1957).

Opinion

249 F.2d 656

Frank A. LOWERY, as owner of the barges, THE INEZ LOWERY and
THE MAE LOWERY, Libellant-Appellee,
v.
HUDSON RIVER DAY LINE, Inc., and THE PETER STUYVESANT,
Respondent-Appellant.

No. 14, Docket 24070.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued Oct. 18, 1957.
Decided Nov. 29, 1957.

O'Connor & Randolph, New York City (Edward L. P. O'Connor and Anthony J. Randolph, New York City, of Counsel), for libellant-appellee.

Hill, Betts & Nash, New York City (Eli Ellis, New York City, of counsel), for respondent-appellant.

Before MEDINA, HINCKS and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the findings and opinion of Judge Galston, 132 F.Supp. 629.

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

Related

Lowery v. Hudson River Day Line, Inc.
132 F. Supp. 629 (E.D. New York, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 F.2d 656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lowery-v-hudson-river-day-line-ca2-1957.