Shafter v. United States

400 F.2d 584
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedOctober 1, 1968
Docket31862_1
StatusPublished

This text of 400 F.2d 584 (Shafter v. United States) 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
Shafter v. United States, 400 F.2d 584 (2d Cir. 1968).

Opinion

400 F.2d 584

Alfred M. SHAFTER, as next friend of the dependents and next of kin of Joaquin Farina Muniz, and for such other persons as may be similarly situated, such as dependents and next of kin of Georg Joseph Kostka, Gerhart Rudi Richard Klatt, Dieter Ahrens, Koch Lothar Ludwig Wilmes and Gunther Schikulla, and Karl-Heinz Weinhold, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee, and
Alfred M. SHAFTER, as next friend of the defendants, etc., et al., Third-Party Defendants.

No. 17.

Docket 31862.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued September 9, 1968.

Decided October 1, 1968.

Plaintiffs appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Marvin E. Frankel, J., entered July 27, 1967, dismissing their complaint for damages brought under the Public Vessels Act, 46 U.S.C. § 781 et seq., on the ground that the suit is barred by the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty Status of Forces Abroad Agreement of June 19, 1951, 4 U.S.T. 1792.

Jacob Rassner, New York City (George G. Kilarjian, New York City, and Francis J. Nicosia, Brooklyn, N. Y., on the brief), for appellants.

Bruno A. Ristau, Washington, D. C. (Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert M. Morgenthau, U. S. Atty. for Southern District of New York, John C. Eldridge and Philip A. Berns, Attys., Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellee.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, and SMITH and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm for the reasons stated in Judge Frankel's opinion, reported at 273 F.Supp. 152 (1967).

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

Related

Shafter v. United States
273 F. Supp. 152 (S.D. New York, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
400 F.2d 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shafter-v-united-states-ca2-1968.