The Bertha F. Walker

220 F. 667, 136 C.C.A. 309, 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2504
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 12, 1915·No. Nos. 95-97·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

These causes present only two questions, both wholly of fact, on testimony sharply conflicting and manifestly irreconcilable. We have carefully examined the whole testimony, and do not find in it sufficient to justify a reversal of the findings, on these two questions, of the District Judge, who saw, heard, and himself questioned the witnesses. Discussion of the evidence seems superfluous; it would contribute nothing illuminative of admiralty law or practice.

The decrees are affirmed, with interest and costs.

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

The Bertha F. Walker, 220 F. 667, 136 C.C.A. 309, 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2504 (2d Cir. 1915).

220 F. 667 (The Bertha F. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

The Severance
152 F.2d 916 (Fourth Circuit, 1945)
Bouchard Transp. Co. v. Diamond P. Transp. Co.
10 F. Supp. 666 (E.D. New York, 1935)
The Pejepscot
10 F. Supp. 400 (E.D. New York, 1934)
The Buffalo
56 F.2d 738 (Second Circuit, 1932)
Greason, Son & Dalzell, Inc. v. Erie R.
56 F.2d 738 (Second Circuit, 1932)
The D., L. & W. No. 442
30 F.2d 250 (Second Circuit, 1929)
Scottish Nav. Co. v. Munson S. S. Line
60 F.2d 101 (S.D. New York, 1924)
Clyde Lighterage Co. v. Pennsylvania R.
258 F. 116 (Second Circuit, 1919)
The Colon
249 F. 460 (Second Circuit, 1918)
The Colon
241 F. 592 (S.D. New York, 1917)