Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co. v. Warren, Moore & Co.

Second Circuit

Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co. v. Warren, Moore & Co.

279 F. 749, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1620

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 26, 1922·No. No. 162·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We agree with all the findings of fact made by Learned Hand, District Judge, in the court below.

The case is not one, strictly speaking, of suit against a wharfinger, and it is not necessary to consider the limits or nature of a wharfinger’s liability. It is enough that the boat went where she did at respondent’s invitation, by respondent’s orders, and for respondent’s service, and that respondent knew of the danger which produced injury, and negligently failed to guard against the plainly probable consequences of obedience to its own orders.

Decree affirmed, with interest and costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

We agree with all the findings of fact made by Learned Hand, District Judge, in the court below.

The case is not one, strictly speaking, of suit against a wharfinger, and it is not necessary to consider the limits or nature of a wharfinger’s liability. It is enough that the boat went where she did at respondent’s invitation, by respondent’s orders, and for respondent’s service, and that respondent knew of the danger which produced injury, and negligently failed to guard against the plainly probable consequences of obedience to its own orders.

Decree affirmed, with interest and costs.

Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co. v. Warren, Moore & Co., 279 F. 749, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1620 (2d Cir. 1922).

Pincite

279 F. 749 (Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co. v. Warren, Moore & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.