TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Standard-Vacuum Transp. Co. v. City of New York

THE SOCONY NO. 123. THE ELMHURST. THE SOCONY NO. 21. STANDARD-VACUUM TRANSP. CO. v. CITY OF NEW YORK CITY OF NEW YORK v. STANDARD-VACUUM TRANSP. CO.

Standard-Vacuum Transp. Co. v. City of N.Y., 78 F.2d 536 (2d Cir. 1935)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 17, 1935
Docket
Nos. 451, 452
Citations
78 F.2d 5361935 A.M.C. 9721935 U.S. App. LEXIS 3785

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the court below that the collision between the barge and ferryboat was due (a) to the failure of the ferryboat to keep clear and (2) to the absence of a light on the bow of the barge. The steamtug was also properly held for failure to provide for a light on the barge. The Sif, 266 F. 166 (C. C. A. 2). Since the libel was filed in rem against both barge and tug, the fault is viewed as that of the vessels themselves, as separate offenders. The Eugene F. Moran v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co., 212 U. S. 466 , 29 S. Ct. 339 , 53 L. Ed. 600 . As the three vessels were at fault, and the barge and tug were the property of libelant, Standard-Vacuum Transportation Co., only one-third of its damages can be recovered. The Eugene F. Moran v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co., supra; The Kookaburra, 69 F.(2d) 71 (C. C. A. 2). The city is entitled to recover two-thirds of its damages; one-third against the barge, and one-third against the tug.

Decree modified.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1941: 11948: 21950: 21952: 11959: 11970: 11971: 119412026peak 1948 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Adams v. Moran94 F. Supp. 520 (S.D.N.Y. 1950)
  2. General Seafoods Corp. v. J. S. Packard Dredging Corp.120 F.2d 117 (1st Cir. 1941)
  3. Moran Towing & Transp. Co., Inc. v. Empresa Hondurena De Vapores194 F.2d 629 (5th Cir. 1952)
  4. The Norwich Victory77 F. Supp. 264 (E.D. Pa. 1948)
  5. In re Socony Vacuum Transp. Co.93 F. Supp. 718 (S.D.N.Y. 1950)
  6. Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Isthmian Lines, Inc.310 F. Supp. 775 (D. Maryland 1970)

Most recent

  1. United States v. M/V MARY E. STAPP335 F. Supp. 975 (S.D. Tex. 1971)
  2. Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Isthmian Lines, Inc.310 F. Supp. 775 (D. Maryland 1970)
  3. Horton & Horton, Inc., Libelant v. The S/s Robert E. Hopkins, Etc., Tide Water Associated Oil Company, Inc.269 F.2d 914 (5th Cir. 1959)
  4. Moran Towing & Transp. Co., Inc. v. Empresa Hondurena De Vapores194 F.2d 629 (5th Cir. 1952)
  5. Adams v. Moran94 F. Supp. 520 (S.D.N.Y. 1950)
  6. In re Socony Vacuum Transp. Co.93 F. Supp. 718 (S.D.N.Y. 1950)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
The Eugene F. Moran, 212 U.S. 466 (1909) 89
Louis-Dreyfus v. Seaboard Great Lakes Corp., 69 F.2d 71 (2d Cir. 1934) 10
The Sif, 266 F. 166 (2d Cir. 1920) 10

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list