McCarthy v. Eggers

1 F. 478, 1880 U.S. App. LEXIS 2383
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York
DecidedFebruary 18, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 1 F. 478 (McCarthy v. Eggers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McCarthy v. Eggers, 1 F. 478, 1880 U.S. App. LEXIS 2383 (circtedny 1880).

Opinion

Blatchford, J.

The district court rendered a decree in favor of the libellant on the ground that he was entitled to a decree unless the respondent had proved the defence set up, which defence that court stated to be that the vessel, at the time of the repairs, was under charter to Dill & Radman, by virtue of an agreement between that firm and the respondent whereby Dill & Radman became owners pro hac vice, and, therefore, alone responsible for the repairs sued for. The district court came to the conclusion that, as matter of fact, the respondent had failed to establish such defence.

On the evidence below, in connection with the further evidence taken in this court on the part of the respondent, I am of the opinion that the agreement set up in the answer is proved, and the defence is established.

The libel must be dismissed, with costs to the respondent in both courts.

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

Related

The U. S. 219
21 F. Supp. 463 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1937)
Johnson, Joseph & G. M. Josselyn & Co. v. Goodwin
229 P. 708 (California Court of Appeal, 1924)
McCarthy v. Eggers
15 F. Cas. 1252 (E.D. New York, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 F. 478, 1880 U.S. App. LEXIS 2383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-eggers-circtedny-1880.