Woodburn v. Sheehy

240 F. 952, 153 C.C.A. 638, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 2448
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedFebruary 6, 1917
DocketNo. 122
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 240 F. 952 (Woodburn v. Sheehy) 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
Woodburn v. Sheehy, 240 F. 952, 153 C.C.A. 638, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 2448 (2d Cir. 1917).

Opinion

AUGUSTUS H. HAND, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). We think the libelant has not proved that the shoal, which caused the damage, was opposite respondents’ portion of the pier, and consequently no cause of action has been established, and the libel was properly dismissed. Moreover, the fact that the scowman did not place his scow along the Agnes Hickey, as directed by the respondent Sheehy, where she would have been safe, and that he took no pains to get her to a place where there was plenty of water when he found she was bearing against an uneven bottom, shows that the fault of the owner caused the injury.

The decree must be affirmed.

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

Related

Tucker v. Elwell
252 F. 874 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
240 F. 952, 153 C.C.A. 638, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 2448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodburn-v-sheehy-ca2-1917.