Twenty Grand Towing, Inc. v. Hector v. Dufrene

Fifth Circuit

Twenty Grand Towing, Inc. v. Hector v. Dufrene

272 F.2d 880, 1962 A.M.C. 228

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 29, 1959

Docket17768

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 272 F.2d 880 (Twenty Grand Towing, Inc. v. Hector v. Dufrene) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Twenty Grand Towing, Inc. v. Hector v. Dufrene, 272 F.2d 880, 1962 A.M.C. 228 (5th Cir. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from findings of fact and a judgment thereon in favor of the li-belant in a suit for wave wash damage occurring on the early morning of April 14, 1956, in the Harvey Canal, a link in the Intercoastal Waterway running south from the west bank of the Mississippi River at New Orleans.

Appellant begins its brief with: “Since McAllister v. United States, 1954, 348 U.S. 19, 75 S.Ct. 6 [99 L.Ed. 20], cast its dark shadow on the traditional admiralty trial de novo it has become common practice for losing parties to approach this court with some temerity, feeling, quite understandably, that the burdens cast upon them by McAllister are practically insurmountable.” Planting itself firmly, however, on “the sincere belief that the findings of the district court are clearly and manifestly erroneous”, and, arguing its case with a vigor and assurance worthy of a better cause, it makes a gallant but unsuccessful attempt to overcome the heavy odds against it. For a careful consideration of the record convinces us that the findings are not only not clearly erroneous but are well supported by the evidence.

The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from findings of fact and a judgment thereon in favor of the li-belant in a suit for wave wash damage occurring on the early morning of April 14, 1956, in the Harvey Canal, a link in the Intercoastal Waterway running south from the west bank of the Mississippi River at New Orleans.

Appellant begins its brief with: “Since McAllister v. United States, 1954, 348 U.S. 19, 75 S.Ct. 6 [99 L.Ed. 20], cast its dark shadow on the traditional admiralty trial de novo it has become common practice for losing parties to approach this court with some temerity, feeling, quite understandably, that the burdens cast upon them by McAllister are practically insurmountable.” Planting itself firmly, however, on “the sincere belief that the findings of the district court are clearly and manifestly erroneous”, and, arguing its case with a vigor and assurance worthy of a better cause, it makes a gallant but unsuccessful attempt to overcome the heavy odds against it. For a careful consideration of the record convinces us that the findings are not only not clearly erroneous but are well supported by the evidence.

The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 F.2d 880, 1962 A.M.C. 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/twenty-grand-towing-inc-v-hector-v-dufrene-ca5-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack