The Gladiator

Second Circuit

The Gladiator

203 F. 690, 121 C.C.A. 648, 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1193

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedFebruary 10, 1913

DocketNos. 69, 70

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 203 F. 690 (The Gladiator) 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

The Gladiator, 203 F. 690, 121 C.C.A. 648, 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1193 (2d Cir. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURTAM.

We concur in Judge Hand’s finding and conclusion that this was a head-on situation, where the Transfer initiated a stárboard to starboard course and kept on without assent to it, ■ and that the Gladiator, having kept her course, was free from fault.

It may be noted that, if the situation were as stated in appellant’s brief — i. e., the Transfer showing a starboard light only to both lights of the Gladiator — then the vessels would be on crossing courses, and the Gladiator the privileged vessel, in which case the conclusion reached as to fault would be the same. We do not think the Gladiator [692]*692was far enough west of the center of the river to constitute a violation of the East River statute. Section 757 of the Consolidation Act; chapter 410, Laws N. Y. 1882.

Decree affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURTAM.

We concur in Judge Hand’s finding and conclusion that this was a head-on situation, where the Transfer initiated a stárboard to starboard course and kept on without assent to it, ■ and that the Gladiator, having kept her course, was free from fault.

It may be noted that, if the situation were as stated in appellant’s brief — i. e., the Transfer showing a starboard light only to both lights of the Gladiator — then the vessels would be on crossing courses, and the Gladiator the privileged vessel, in which case the conclusion reached as to fault would be the same. We do not think the Gladiator [692]*692was far enough west of the center of the river to constitute a violation of the East River statute. Section 757 of the Consolidation Act; chapter 410, Laws N. Y. 1882.

Decree affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 F. 690, 121 C.C.A. 648, 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-gladiator-ca2-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack