James Udall, Libellant and Appellant v. Theohio, Her Tackle Marshall Roberts and Others, Claimants

• Decision Date: 01 December 1854
• Docket Number: STEAM-SHIP
• Citation: 58 U.S. 17,15 L.Ed. 42,17 How. 17
• Parties: JAMES UDALL, LIBELLANT AND APPELLANT, v. THEOHIO, HER TACKLE, &C., MARSHALL O. ROBERTS AND OTHERS, CLAIMANTS
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

58 U.S. 17

17 How. 17

15 L.Ed. 42

JAMES UDALL, LIBELLANT AND APPELLANT, v. THE STEAM-SHIP OHIO, HER TACKLE, &C., MARSHALL O.

ROBERTS AND OTHERS, CLAIMANTS.

December Term, 1854

THIS was an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York.

It was a libel filed in the district court, for furnishing articles for the steam-ship Ohio.

A motion was made by Mr. Cutting, and opposed by Mr. Bradley, with whom was Mr. Benedict, to dismiss the appeal, for the want of jurisdiction.

The points made were the same as those in the succeding case, and there was an affidavit of value made by Mr. Benedict. The affidavit also set forth 'that the rules of the district court required libels to be sworn to, so that it is necessary, in stating the amount claimed, to state the same as it actually and in truth exists at the time the libel is sworn to, and on such libels the court, in its final decree, gives such amount as the libellant shall be entitled to recover on his case, whether the same be more or less than the amount in the libel.'

The amount of the claim and the history of the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York, in admiralty.

The libel was filed in the district court, which stated that in the years 1847 and 1848, the steam-ship Ohio, then being in process of construction by Bishop and Simonson, the libellant furnished, at the city of New York, for the building of said vessel, a large quantity of materials, timber, and tree-nails. That said articles, at a fair price, amounted in the whole to the sum of $2,973.57, of which sum there is still due $2,159.28, less tree-nails, which not having been used were to be received back by the libellant, amounting to the sum of $468. That

the balance of $1,691.28, the owners, or those in charge of said vessel, have refused to pay, &c.

The appeal states the claim to be, at the time of the trial in the circuit court, interest included, $2,164.86.

The libel was dismissed in the district court, and the case was appealed to the circuit court. In that court, the decree of the district court was affirmed, from which an appeal was taken to this court.

A motion is now made to dismiss the appeal, for want of jurisdiction.

It is stated by the counsel opposed to the motion, that it is the uniform practice in the...