Marriner v. Luting

S.D. New York

Marriner v. Luting

16 F. Cas. 783

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 1, 1863·Published

Opinion

SHIPMAN, District Judge,

without hearing the counsel for the libellants said he was inclined to the opinion that the respondent was correct in his construction of the charter party, but that as he had not objected to the bill on that ground when first presented, the transaction between the parties was a fixing of the amount to be paid as in the bill stated, less the hogsheads to be deducted, and he gave a decree for the amount claimed by the libellants.

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

SHIPMAN, District Judge,

without hearing the counsel for the libellants said he was inclined to the opinion that the respondent was correct in his construction of the charter party, but that as he had not objected to the bill on that ground when first presented, the transaction between the parties was a fixing of the amount to be paid as in the bill stated, less the hogsheads to be deducted, and he gave a decree for the amount claimed by the libellants.

Marriner v. Luting, 16 F. Cas. 783 (S.D.N.Y. 1863).

Pincite

16 F. Cas. 783 (Marriner v. Luting) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.