The Titanic

218 F. 990, 133 C.C.A. 673, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1630
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in The Titanic. Read the opinion of the Court — 225 F. 747
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided October 30, 1914·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

An injunction in limited liability proceedings is not a matter of discretion of the District Court, but a matter of statutory right. If the form of the injunction issued does not conform to the intention of Congress, .any one aggrieved -may insist upon its being made to do so. Our previous modification of this -particular injunction concerned only death claimants. We gave them ’the privilege of beginning .actions with-in one year from the death, so as to preserve the cause of action created by Lord Campbell’s Act [991]*991in the event that the proceedings to limit liability were dismissed after that period bad expired. In re Oceanic Steam Nav. Co., 204 Fed. 260, 124 C. C. A. 352. Tbe District Judge, in declining to dispose of the motion to alter the form of the injunction in this case, seems to have been influenced both by a sense of propriety and by a doubt of power. There is nothing in what we have heretofore said to prevent him from controlling the injunction in any other particular than the one we decided. We leave the motion to be disposed of by him, without issuing any peremptory mandamus.

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

The Titanic, 218 F. 990, 133 C.C.A. 673, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1630 (2d Cir. 1914).

218 F. 990 (The Titanic) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Oceanic Steam Navigation Co.
204 F. 260 (Second Circuit, 1913)