The G.F. Brown

Decision Date18 March 1885
CitationThe G.F. Brown, 24 F. 399 (D. Conn. 1885)
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
PartiesTHE G. F. BROWN. v. THE G. F. BROWN. NEW JERSEY DRY DOCK & TRANSP. CO. LORD v. SAME. L'HOMMEDIEU v. SAME. HARTFORD & NEW YORK TRANSP. CO. v. SAME. PALMER and another v. SAME.

Wilcox Adams & Macklin, for the Dry Dock Co. and the Hartford & N Y. Transp. Co.

N. R Hart, for George Lord, Jr.

Charles Murray, for L'Hommedieu and Palmer & Duff.

SHIPMAN J.

The proctors in these cases have presented the questions in regard to the apportionment of the fund in court among the lienors upon the facts as they are shown in the libels and the accompanying papers, without any other proofs.

The G F. Brown appears to have been a small coasting schooner, owned in Connecticut, and making short and frequent trips which could hardly be called voyages. George Lord, Jr., was hired as mate of said vessel for an indefinite time at $25 per month, and on January 7, 1885, there was due to him, as such mate, for two months and 18 days' services previous thereto, the sum of $56.15.

In September, 1884, Palmer & Duff, of Greenwich, Connecticut, furnished, at said Greenwich, materials and repairs upon said vessel, for which $123.91 are now due, but never, so far as appears from their libel, filed a certificate of lien in any town clerk's office as required by the Connecticut statute in regard to liens upon vessels. Said statute provides as follows: 'No such claim' (for materials furnished, or services rendered in the construction or repairs of a vessel) 'shall remain a lien on such vessel or its appurtenances more than ten days after the person performing such services, or furnishing such materials, has ceased so to do, unless he shall sign and lodge with the town clerk of the town where such vessel was so constructed or repaired a certificate in writing,' describing, among other things, the vessel and the amount claimed as a lien thereon.

On December 6, 1884, while said schooner was lying at Elizabethport, New Jersey, laden with a cargo for Stamford Connecticut, she was damaged, and was repaired by the Dry Dock & Transportation Company, whose bill for said repairs, wholly unpaid, is $686.87. On December 27, 1884, and as soon as the repairs were finished, she started for Stamford, and, at the request of her captain, was towed by the steam-tug Ceres from Elizabethport to the bay of New York, for which service $20 is due to Samuel L'Hommedieu...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
  • THE WILLIAM LEISHEAR
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • September 21, 1927
    ...(C. C. A.) 278 F. 886. That wage claims precede repair and supply liens is well established. The Grapeshot (D. C.) 22 F. 123; The G. F. Brown (D. C.) 24 F. 399; The Philomena (D. C.) 200 F. 873. Wage claims also precede wharfage. Provost v. The Selkirk, 20 Fed. Cas. No. 2. As to the claim i......
  • The Mary Elizabeth
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama
    • June 1, 1885