North American Steel Prod. Corp. v. THE S/S ANDROS MENTOR
Decision Date | 07 June 1961 |
Parties | NORTH AMERICAN STEEL PRODUCTS CORP., Shwayder Brothers, Incorporated, Max Schlossberg Co. and Artco Industrial Company, Inc., Libelants, v. THE S/S ANDROS MENTOR, believed since renamed THE S/S LOUROS, her engines, boilers, tackle, etc., and Clipper Line, Ltd., Cia. San Juan, San Rafael S. A., and Johs. Fritzen & Son, Inc., Respondents. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Vincent & Grist, New York City, for libelants; Yorkston W. Grist, New York City, of counsel.
Haight, Gardner, Poor & Havens, New York City, for respondent Cia. San Juan; Gordon W. Paulsen, Richard G. Ashworth, New York City, of counsel.
Respondent Cia. San Juan has filed an exception and exceptive allegations to the libel. The libel is for cargo damage, brought against the S/S Andros Mentor in rem and in personam against her owner, respondent San Rafael, her time charterer, Cia. San Juan, and respondent Johs. Fritzen & Son, Inc., New York agent for the time charterer. The time charterer asserts in the exceptive allegations that under its contractual relationship it cannot be held liable for the damages. The libelants argue that an exceptive allegation is not the proper procedure for raising this defense and that the time charterer in effect is seeking summary judgment through the use of this procedure.
Such allegations have long been sanctioned for use in admiralty, although there is no basis for them in either statute or rule. United States v. 422 Casks of Wine, 1 Pet. 547, 550, 26 U.S. 547, 550, 7 L.Ed. 257; Suspine v. Compania Transatlantica Centroamericana, D.C.S. D.N.Y.1940, 37 F.Supp. 263. In light of this history the practice can scarcely be challenged as a "basic procedural innovation" within the rationale of Miner v. Atlass, 1960, 363 U.S. 641, 650, 80 S.Ct. 1300, 1306, 4 L.Ed.2d 1462.
Reasonable limitations have been put on the use of exceptive allegations. The matters that may be brought up on exceptive allegations are similar to those presented by the old plea in abatement. Haiti (Standard Brands, Inc. v. Elliot Shipping & Land Co., Inc.), D.C.S. D.N.Y., 1938 A.M.C 895; Benedict on Admiralty, supra. Respondent's exceptive allegations regarding the charter parties do not fall within the limitations placed upon the use of such allegations. Sprague & Son Co....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Delaware River Terminals, Inc. v. M/S ANCORA
...the effect that exceptive allegations may not be used as a substitute for a summary judgment, e. g. North American Steel Prod. Corp. v. S.S. Andros Mentor, 194 F.Supp. 394 (S.D.N.Y.1961). This Court, however, prefers to pretermit so far as possible any discussion of admiralty pleading, and ......
- Williams v. Ball, Civ. No. 9081.