Southern Transp. Co. v. The Julius H. Barnes

Second Circuit

Southern Transp. Co. v. The Julius H. Barnes

147 F.2d 545, 1945 A.M.C. 666

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 22, 1945·No. Nos. 210, 211·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

These appeals are from interlocutory decrees in admiralty entered in suits filed because of a collision in New York Bay between the Tug Calateo No. 2 and the M/V Barnes.

The district judge, of the opinion that both vessels were at fault and that damages should be divided, made findings of fact and conclusions of law, and wrote an opinion accordingly. His opinion fully and carefully marshals and determines the effect of the evidence.

We are unable to agree with libellant that the decision incorrectly adjudged the facts or is in conflict with any applicable legal principle. It will serve no useful purpose for us to do again what the district judge has already done so well, retell the story of the collision, trace and point out wherein its actors were at fault. It is sufficient for us to say that we approve both what the district judge did and the way he did it, and that on his opinion and for the reasons that he gave, we affirm his decrees.

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

PER CURIAM.

These appeals are from interlocutory decrees in admiralty entered in suits filed because of a collision in New York Bay between the Tug Calateo No. 2 and the M/V Barnes.

The district judge, of the opinion that both vessels were at fault and that damages should be divided, made findings of fact and conclusions of law, and wrote an opinion accordingly. His opinion fully and carefully marshals and determines the effect of the evidence.

We are unable to agree with libellant that the decision incorrectly adjudged the facts or is in conflict with any applicable legal principle. It will serve no useful purpose for us to do again what the district judge has already done so well, retell the story of the collision, trace and point out wherein its actors were at fault. It is sufficient for us to say that we approve both what the district judge did and the way he did it, and that on his opinion and for the reasons that he gave, we affirm his decrees.

Southern Transp. Co. v. The Julius H. Barnes, 147 F.2d 545, 1945 A.M.C. 666 (2d Cir. 1945).

Pincite

147 F.2d 545 (Southern Transp. Co. v. The Julius H. Barnes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related