30 F.2d 946 (S.D.N.Y. 1929), Royal Ins. Co., Ltd. v. United States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation
|Citation:||30 F.2d 946|
|Opinion Judge:||THACHER, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).|
|Party Name:||ROYAL INS. CO., Limited, et al. v. UNITED STATES SHIPPING BOARD MERCHANT FLEET CORPORATION. BUCHANAN et al. v. SAME.|
|Attorney:||Barry, Wainwright, Thacher & Symmers, of New York City (John C. Crawley, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs. Charles H. Tuttle, U.S. Atty., of New York City )Walter Schaffner, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for defendant.|
|Case Date:||February 26, 1929|
|Court:||United States District Courts, 2nd Circuit, Southern District of New York|
At Law. Actions by the Royal Insurance Company, Limited, and others, and by Alexander Buchanan, doing business under the name of Buchanan, Forsyth & Co., and others, against the United States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation. Motions for dismissal granted.
Two actions at law, brought to recover damages to cargo shipped in the year 1922 on the steamship Eastern Glade, a vessel owned by the United States of America and operated by the defendant as a merchant vessel. Under a stipulation between the parties in each action, two defenses are to be deemed to have been raised by appropriate pleadings, and, if these defenses are overruled, judgment is to be entered in favor of the plaintiffs for an amount which is stipulated. Upon this stipulation defendant has moved for judgment dismissing the complaints, and upon the argument plaintiffs by counter motion (notice thereof being waived) have moved for judgments in the amounts stipulated.
One of the defenses to be considered presents the contention that the Act of Congress approved March 9, 1920, commonly known as the Suits in Admiralty Act (41 Stat. 525, c. 95; U.S.C. tit. 46, § 741 et seq. (46 USCA § 741 et seq.)), affords an exclusive remedy against the United States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation for any cause of action for which a libel in admiralty could be filed under the provisions of said act, and that therefore the court in this proceeding is without jurisdiction of the causes of action set forth in the complaints.
There is no question that the Eastern Glade was owned by the United States and operated as a merchant vessel by the defendant under an agency agreement with the Mallory Transport Lines, appointed by the defendant to manage, operate, and conduct the business of such vessel. Consequently these suits might have been brought under the Suits in...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP