Taylor v. The Joseph Walker

S.D. New York

Taylor v. The Joseph Walker

23 F. Cas. 778, 17 Leg. Int. 255

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedJuly 1, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 F. Cas. 778 (Taylor v. The Joseph Walker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Taylor v. The Joseph Walker, 23 F. Cas. 778, 17 Leg. Int. 255 (S.D.N.Y. 1860).

Pincite

Opinion

BETTS, District Judge.

This was an action to recover wharfage. The ship was lying at a pier in the East river, and having caught fire, was pulled away from the pier, scuttled and sunk in the middle of the slip, and lay there some time longer.

Held by the court: That if there is a lien on vessel for wharfage, it is exclusively so by statute usage, or special contract, and is enforced upon that right and not as maritime obligation.

That the vessel being a domestic vessel, a lien on her to the owner of the wharf springs out of the usage of the trade or business of wharfinger, and is local of its character, and except when imparted by express statute, only follows the actual possession of the thing.

That if this case falls within the cognizance of this court, it is so because the cause of action is for supplies furnished the vessel in her home port. But the supreme court have decided that the jurisdiction of admiralty does not embrace such cases. [Chamberlain v. Ward] 21 How. [62 U. S.] 548. And it does not affect the powers of the court that the action was instituted previous to May 1, 1S59. Sup. Ct. Rule, 12. That the action cannot be maintained for the period the vessel was sunk and was not supplied with wharfage services.

Libel dismissed with costs.

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

BETTS, District Judge.

This was an action to recover wharfage. The ship was lying at a pier in the East river, and having caught fire, was pulled away from the pier, scuttled and sunk in the middle of the slip, and lay there some time longer.

Held by the court: That if there is a lien on vessel for wharfage, it is exclusively so by statute usage, or special contract, and is enforced upon that right and not as maritime obligation.

That the vessel being a domestic vessel, a lien on her to the owner of the wharf springs out of the usage of the trade or business of wharfinger, and is local of its character, and except when imparted by express statute, only follows the actual possession of the thing.

That if this case falls within the cognizance of this court, it is so because the cause of action is for supplies furnished the vessel in her home port. But the supreme court have decided that the jurisdiction of admiralty does not embrace such cases. [Chamberlain v. Ward] 21 How. [62 U. S.] 548. And it does not affect the powers of the court that the action was instituted previous to May 1, 1S59. Sup. Ct. Rule, 12. That the action cannot be maintained for the period the vessel was sunk and was not supplied with wharfage services.

Libel dismissed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 F. Cas. 778, 17 Leg. Int. 255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-the-joseph-walker-nysd-1860.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack