Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County

Second Circuit

Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County

113 F.2d 931, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 3494, 1940 A.M.C. 1298

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJuly 29, 1940

DocketNo. 368

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 113 F.2d 931 (Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County) 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

Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County, 113 F.2d 931, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 3494, 1940 A.M.C. 1298 (2d Cir. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The libel seeks damages resulting from the laying of a sewer pipe that impaired access by water to the libelant’s land. On a prior appeal this court sustained the admiralty jurisdiction of the District Court and remanded the cause for determination of the question whether the sewer pipe was laid in accordance with the permit issued by the War Department. Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County, 2 Cir., 100 F.2d 360, certiorari denied, 306 U.S. 642, 59 S.Ct. 582, 83 L.Ed. 1042. The permit, dated October 2, 1929, authorized the respondent “to lay a sewer pipe in a trench * * * in accordance with the plans shown on the drawings attached hereto * * Upon the evidence presented at a hearing held pursuant to our mandate the District Court found as a fact that the sewer, pipe was not laid in accordance with the permit, and granted the libel-ant an interlocutory decree from which the present appeal was taken.

This appeal presents a very narrow issue. Adhering, as we do, to our prior decision as to the law the sole question is whether Judge Clancy’s finding of fact is sustainable. The evidence supports it. Much of the sewer was laid on piles capped by timbers upon which the pipe rested. Evidence is lacking of any excavation before the piles were driven. There was a failure of proof that the sewer was laid “in a trench” as the permit required.

Decree affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The libel seeks damages resulting from the laying of a sewer pipe that impaired access by water to the libelant’s land. On a prior appeal this court sustained the admiralty jurisdiction of the District Court and remanded the cause for determination of the question whether the sewer pipe was laid in accordance with the permit issued by the War Department. Sound Marine & Machine Corp. v. Westchester County, 2 Cir., 100 F.2d 360, certiorari denied, 306 U.S. 642, 59 S.Ct. 582, 83 L.Ed. 1042. The permit, dated October 2, 1929, authorized the respondent “to lay a sewer pipe in a trench * * * in accordance with the plans shown on the drawings attached hereto * * Upon the evidence presented at a hearing held pursuant to our mandate the District Court found as a fact that the sewer, pipe was not laid in accordance with the permit, and granted the libel-ant an interlocutory decree from which the present appeal was taken.

This appeal presents a very narrow issue. Adhering, as we do, to our prior decision as to the law the sole question is whether Judge Clancy’s finding of fact is sustainable. The evidence supports it. Much of the sewer was laid on piles capped by timbers upon which the pipe rested. Evidence is lacking of any excavation before the piles were driven. There was a failure of proof that the sewer was laid “in a trench” as the permit required.

Decree affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 F.2d 931, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 3494, 1940 A.M.C. 1298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sound-marine-machine-corp-v-westchester-county-ca2-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack