THE ATLANTA, 505
| Decision Date | 27 August 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 505,506,507.,505 |
| Citation | 82 F. Supp. 218 |
| Parties | THE ATLANTA. GIANNELIS et al. v. THE ATLANTA. CARAVAN SHIPPING CORPORATION v. THE ATLANTA. CORINTHIAN S. S. CO., S. A., v. CARAVAN SHIPPING CORPORATION. COOK v. THE ATLANTA. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Anderson, Connerat, Dunn & Hunter, of Savannah, Ga., for Caravan Shipping Corporation.
Harry P. Anestos, of Savannah, Ga., for Corinthian S. S. Co., S. A.
Stephens & Gignilliat, W. Leon Friedman, and R. W. McDuffee, all of Savannah, Ga., for Theodore A. Kolgaklis, James C. Nash, and Alexander Vergas.
Robert E. Falligant, of Savannah, Ga., for Oceanic Ship Scaling & Printing Co., Inc.
William F. Braziel, of Savannah, Ga., for Demetrious Pantazopoulos, Captain, S.S. Atlanta.
John J. Sullivan, of Savannah, Ga., for R. M. Cook, Marine Surveyor.
George G. McCoy and George N. Peter Pahno, both of Savannah, Ga., for Ioannis Giannelis et al., members of crew S.S. Atlanta.
Albert L. Cobb, of Savannah, Ga., for John Georgaros.
O. H. Page, Jr., of Savannah, Ga., for Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
J. Saxton Daniel, U. S. Dist. Atty., of Savannah Ga., for the United States.
There being no exceptions filed to the Special Commissioner's report, but the parties affected being in Court and consenting:
It is ordered, decreed and adjudged that the report of the Commissioner be adopted and approved and made the order and finding of this Court, except that by consent of all parties judgment is rendered for the Caravan Shipping Corporation in the sum of Six Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty ($6,750) Dollars instead of the sum shown in the Commissioner's report; in all other respects, the same being confirmed as rendered.
The Clerk of this Court will forthwith distribute the sums found for the parties to their respective attorneys of record, from the proceeds of sale of said vessel now on deposit in the registry of this Court.
After evidence heard, a reasonable fee is fixed for A. A. Lawrence, Esq., Special Commissioner, in the sum of One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty ($1,250.00) Dollars and One Hundred ($100) Dollars to said Commissioner for out-of-pocket expenses incurred by him in the preparation and mimeographing of his said report.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. The Pomare
...due them, and that such liens are entitled to priority over the claim of the government (for penalties.)" See also The Atlanta, D.C.Ga., 1948, 82 F.Supp. 218, 221, 240; 56 C.J. 1054, Seamen, Section F. Conclusion. The foregoing authorities establish that, in the absence of specific statutor......
-
Sperbeck v. AL Burbank & Co.
...Line, Inc., 163 Misc. 587, 296 N.Y.S. 293. 4 Methodist Episcopal Hospital v. Pacific Transport Co., D.C.Cal., 3 F.2d 508; cf. The Atlanta, D.C., 82 F.Supp. 218, 235; but see Hegsted, Administrator v. Standard Transp. Co., 1934 A.M.C. 190 (D.C. 5 Prosser, Torts (1941) 953; Street, Foundation......
-
E.S. Binnings, Inc. v. M/V Saudi Riyadh
...and freight agent because contract was not a maritime contract and therefore could not be basis of maritime lien); The Atlanta, 82 F.Supp. 218, 238 (S.D.Ga.1948) (no maritime lien for commissions for securing charter The reason for excluding such contracts is the distinction long recognized......
-
PT Perusahaan Pelay. Sam. Trikora L. v. TS SALZACHTAL
...subrogation where he pays for the material or services. Rodriquez v. The G. K. Dauntless, 70 F.Supp. 958 (S.D.Fla.1947); The Atlanta, 82 F.Supp. 218, 235 (S.D. Ga.1948); Galatis v. Galatis, 55 F.2d 571 (5th Cir. 1932). In ascertaining who is entitled to a lien, we must also take into accoun......