United States v. Commonwealth Dominion Line
| Decision Date | 21 January 1929 |
| Docket Number | No. 21,21 |
| Citation | 73 L.Ed. 439,49 S.Ct. 183,278 U.S. 427 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. COMMONWEALTH & DOMINION LINE, Limited |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
The Attorney General and Mr. George R. Farnum, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the United States.
Messrs. Allan B. A. Bradley and George De Forest Lord, both of New York City, for respondent.
This is a libel in admiralty against the United States as owner of the steam collier Proteus to recover damages caused by a collision with the libelant's vessel Port Phillip. The District Court and the Circuit Court of Appeals agreed in finding that the Proteus alone was in fault, but the Circuit Court of Appeals modified the decree against the United States by allowing interest on the damages found. 20 F.(2d) 729. A writ of certiorari was granted by this Court (275 U. S. 521, 48 S. Ct. 159, 72 L. Ed. 405) to review the decision as to interest, consideration of the question to await the decision of this Court in the case of Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 278 U. S. 41, 49 S. Ct. 52, 73 L. Ed. —, which now has been decided (November 19, 1928), and in which interest was denied.
Jurisdiction in Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States was granted by a special act authorizing judgment 'for the amount of the legal damages sustained by reason of said collision, * * * upon the same principle and measure of liability with costs as in like cases in admiralty between private parties with the same rights of appeal.' It was held in view of the history of legislation that the words were to be taken strictly and that no interest could be allowed against the United States. The present suit is based upon the special Act of March 4, 1923, c. 321, 42 Stat. 1796, where the language is substantially the same, except that it is further qualified; jurisdiction of the suit is granted 'to the extent only of such damages suffered other than claims for the demurrage to (the Port Phillip) and to enter a judgment or decree for the amount of such damages and costs, if any, as shall be found to be due against the United States in favor of the owner of the British steamer Port Phillip or against such owner in favor of the United States, upon the same principles and measures of liability as in like cases in admiralty between private parties and with the same rights of appeal.' The only ground of distinction favorable to the Port Phillip is that in this case the United States filed a cross...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. SS Soya Atlantic
...pilot and thereafter. 12 Commonwealth & Dominion Line v. United States, 2 Cir., 20 F.2d 729, 731, reversed on other grounds 278 U.S. 427, 49 S.Ct. 183, 73 L.Ed. 439; Skibs Aktieselskapet Orenor v. The Audrey, E.D. Va., 181 F.Supp. 697, affirmed Gratsos v. The Moisie Bay, 4 Cir., 287 F.2d 70......
-
Trinidad Corp. v. S.S. KEIYOH MARU
...movements." Commonwealth & Dominion Line v. United States, 20 F.2d 729, 731 (2d Cir.1927), rev'd on other grounds, 278 U.S. 427, 429, 49 S.Ct. 183, 183, 73 L.Ed. 439 (1929); see also United States v. S.S. Soya Atlantic, 330 F.2d 732, 737 (4th Cir.1964). The district court found that the KEI......
-
THE WRIGHT
...D.C. Mass., 16 F.2d 643), for the claimant had filed no cross-libel. Thereafter the Court held in United States v. Commonwealth & Dominion Line, Ltd., 278 U.S. 427, 49 S.Ct. 183, 73 L.Ed. 439, reversing 2 Cir., 20 F.2d 729, that the result would be the same even though the United States had......
-
Ex parte Andrews
... ... 329; Dworkin v ... Ins. Co., 285 Mo. 342; United States v. Ry ... Co., 49 S.Ct. 183; United States v ... ...