THE UCAYALI, 562.

Decision Date13 October 1942
Docket NumberNo. 562.,562.
Citation47 F. Supp. 203
PartiesTHE UCAYALI. GALBAN LOBO CO., S. A., v. COMPANIA PERUANA DE VAPORES Y DIQUE DEL CALLAO et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana

Terriberry, Young, Rault & Carroll, of New Orleans, La., for plaintiff.

Monroe & Lemann and Nicholas Callan, all of New Orleans, La., for defendant.

BORAH, District Judge.

The question here is whether or not the respondent and claimant has entered a general appearance, and submitted itself to the jurisdiction of the court, thereby waiving any right to maintain a plea of sovereign immunity.

The following is a statement of the proceedings in the order in which they occurred.

On March 30, 1942, the present libel in rem was filed by libellant against the steamship Ucayali seeking to recover losses and damages growing out of a breach of a contract of carriage between libellant's agent at Callao, Peru, and Compania Peruana de Vapores y Dique del Callao, alleged on information and belief to be the owner of the steamship Ucayali. On the same day admiralty process in rem was issued by the Clerk and on the day following the United States Marshal executed the warrant of arrest and from that day until released on bond the vessel remained under seizure in the custody of the United States Marshal.

In order to relieve proctors representing the vessel from the burden of applying and obtaining an order of court fixing the amount of the bond, proctors for the libellant did, on April 1, 1942, in accordance with usual practice, address a letter to the United States Marshal advising him "that the libellant is agreeable to having the S. S. Ucayali released from seizure upon the posting of a surety release bond in the sum of $60,000.00". The original of this letter was delivered to proctors for the Ucayali.

On April 9, 1942, a sworn claim for the Ucayali was filed by the Republic of Peru, in which it alleged itself to be "* * * the true and bona fide sole owner of the said S. S. Ucayali * * *; wherefore it prays to defend accordingly. The filing of this claim is not a general appearance and is without prejudice to or waiver of all defenses and objections which may be available to respondent and claimant particularly but not exclusively sovereign immunity."

On the same day a surety release bond, dated April 9th, in the amount of $60,000.00, whereon the Republic of Peru was principal, and the National Surety Company was surety, was filed for the release of the Ucayali. This bond though containing a reservation identical with that contained in the claim was otherwise in the usual form, the condition of the bond being "that if said claimant and surety abide by all the orders interlocutory or final of the court and pay the libelant the amount awarded by final decree rendered in the court to which the process is returnable, or in any appellate court, then the foregoing obligation is to be voided, but otherwise it will remain in full force and effect."

This bond contained a recital that the admiralty warrant had been issued by way of foreign attachment and upon discovery of the error was amended by striking out the words "by process of foreign attachment" and substituting therefor the words "by process in rem".

On April 11, 1942, in accordance with the desire theretofore expressed by proctors for the Republic of Peru, the testimony of Francisco Olsen, master of the Ucayali, was taken on the merits of the case. Before swearing the witness, the following was dictated into the record by proctor for respondent.

"The testimony of Francisco Olsen, the master of the Peruvian Steamship Ucayali, is taken with full reservation and without waiver of all defenses and objections which may be available to respondent and claimant, particularly but not exclusively sovereign immunity; and the appearance of counsel for the Government of Peru and the Steamship Ucayali is for the special purpose only of taking the testimony of the master under the reservation aforesaid."

To which proctor for libellant replied: "I agree to the taking of the testimony of the master by consent at the offices of Messrs. Monroe & Lemann on Saturday, April 11, 1942, and agree to waiving, signing, sealing, certification and filing and all the other formalities provided by the de bene esse statute. I, however, do not agree to any reservation or attempted reservation as to the plea of sovereign immunity or any other plea that may in fact be waived by the taking of the testimony of the master."

After the witness was sworn and began his testimony, proctor for libellant made the following statement: "I wish to say, on behalf...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • In re Josephson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • December 23, 1954
    ... ... 793, 87 L.Ed. 1014. There a libel in rem was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against the Ucayali, 47 F.Supp. 203. The Republic of Peru, claiming the vessel as its own, and thus as being immune from such suit, moved in the district court for ... ...
  • Ex parte Republic of Peru. the Ucayali. riginal
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 5, 1943
    ... ... Page 588 ... whether the vessel when seized was petitioner's, and was of a character entitling it to the immunity. See Ex parte Muir, supra; The Pesaro, 255 U.S. 216, 41 S.Ct. 308, 65 L.Ed. 592; Berizzi Bros. Co. v. S.S. Pesaro, 271 U.S. 562, 46 S.Ct. 611, 70 L.Ed. 1088; The Navemar, supra. Therefore the question which we must decide is not whether there was jurisdiction in the district court, acquired by the appearance of petitioner, but whether the jurisdiction which the court had already acquired by seizure of the vessel should have ... ...
  • United States v. Nicolls
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • October 20, 1942
  • United States v. Hoerner
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Montana
    • December 20, 1957
    ... ... Riedel Glass Works, Inc. v. Keegan, D.C.Me.S.D.1942, 43 F.Supp. 153, 159; The Ucayali, D.C. La.1942, 47 F.Supp. 203; 6 C.J.S. Appearances § 13, p. 42. In Montana, the rule has been stated thus: "In fact, any act which recognizes the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT