Sloan v. The Flowergate

31 F. 762, 1887 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 251
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York
DecidedApril 7, 1887
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 31 F. 762 (Sloan v. The Flowergate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sloan v. The Flowergate, 31 F. 762, 1887 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 251 (E.D.N.Y. 1887).

Opinion

Benedict, J.

The evidence is not sufficient to justify finding as a fact that the condition of the oy e-bolt, when it was put to use at the time the plaintiff was injured through its giving way, was such as to inform anyone of the fact that the bolt was already partly broken off. The eye ivas connter-sunk in the dock, and the old break was below the upper surface of the deck. This location rendered the defect in truth latent. The use of an eye-bolt, apparently sufficient, but in reality insufficient solely because of a latent delect, entails no liability for damages caused by such defect.

The libel must be dismissed, with costs.

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

Related

Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc.
362 U.S. 539 (Supreme Court, 1960)
George W. Dixon, Libelant-Appellee v. United States
219 F.2d 10 (Second Circuit, 1955)
Weeks v. Wilson Transit Co.
61 F. 120 (Sixth Circuit, 1894)
Lunney v. The Concord
58 F. 913 (S.D. New York, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 F. 762, 1887 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sloan-v-the-flowergate-nyed-1887.