Torices v. Winged Racer

24 F. Cas. 62, 39 Hunt Mer. Mag. 458
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 15, 1858·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

HELD BY THE COURT

(BETTS, District Judge):

That by the maritime law a ship is not bound to the performance of a contract for her employment, unless there be mutually a liability charged on cargo on board for the satisfaction of those services. When the contract is for the prospective employment of a ship in transportation of cargo which is not placed on board, the remedy for a breach of such contract is in the common law courts. That the clause in the charter by which the owners engage “their vessel, rigging, etc., as by law,” subjects the security to the operation of the law maritime upon credits of that character. That the libelant therefore shows no lien upon the vessel of which the court can take cognizance, and the exception to the jurisdiction of the court must therefore be allowed. Libel dismissed.

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

Torices v. Winged Racer, 24 F. Cas. 62, 39 Hunt Mer. Mag. 458 (S.D.N.Y. 1858).

24 F. Cas. 62 (Torices v. Winged Racer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gronvold v. Suryan
12 F. Supp. 429 (W.D. Washington, 1935)
Selover v. Schoellkopf
86 F. 656 (Second Circuit, 1898)