118 U.S. 507 (1886), Dyer v. National Steam Nav. Co. (u.s. Reports Title: The Scotland)
|Citation:||118 U.S. 507, 6 S.Ct. 1174, 30 L.Ed. 153|
|Party Name:||DYER and others v. NATIONAL STEAM NAV. CO. [*]|
|Case Date:||May 10, 1886|
|Court:||United States Supreme Court|
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.
MATTHEWS, MILLER, HARLAN, and GRAY, JJ., dissent.
[6 S.Ct. 1174] Jas. C. Carter and E. N. Taft, for appellants, Joseph W. Dyer and others.
John Chetwood, for appellee, National Steam Nav. Co.
This case presents nearly the same questions which have just been considered in the case of Place v. Norwich & N. Y. Transp. Co., ante, 1150. It was before this court in October term, 1881, and was decided in March, 1882. See The Scotland, 105 U.S. 24. From the report of the case, but not from the record now before us, we learn that the ship Kate Dyer and the steam-ship Scotland (the latter belonging to the appellee) came into collision in December, 1866, opposite Fire Island light, and the former immediately ately sank, and was lost. The Scotland, being badly injured, put back for New York, but sank outside and south of Sandy Hook, only some strippings being rescued from her before she
went down. The owners of the Kate Dyer, and others who had suffered loss, filed libels in personam against the National Steam Navigation Company, respondent, and now appellee, who filed an answer denying that the Scotland was in fault, and pleading that she was sunk and destroyed, and therefore that there was no liability against the respondent. The circuit court, on appeal from the district court, found the Scotland in fault, and rendered a decree in favor of the libelants for the full amount of their damage, amounting, with interest, to upwards of $250,000, besides the costs of the libelants in the district court, amounting to $2,173.10. This decree was reversed by this court in March, 1882, so far as it condemned the respondent to pay the whole amount of damages sustained by the libelants and intervenors, and affirmed as to the residue, the court, in its opinion, [6 S.Ct. 1175] holding that the amount of the respondent's liability was the value of the ship's strippings which were saved from the wreck.
The case went back to the circuit court, but was not further prosecuted until June, 1883, when the libelants applied for leave to file a supplemental allegation to their libel, for the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP