|
Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd., 281 U.S. 515 (1930)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd., 281 U.S. 515 (1930)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 281 U.S. 511, click here.
Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd. No. 397 Argued April 22, 1930 Decided May 19, 1930 281 U.S. 515
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. The retention of jurisdiction of a suit in admiralty between foreigners is within the discretion of the district court, and the exercise of that discretion may not be disturbed unless abused. P. 517.
2. Liability in general average arises not from contract, but from participation in the common venture, and its extent in the absence of limiting clauses in the bill of lading is, under the admiralty rule, fixed by the law of the port of destination. Id.
3. In a suit in admiralty between British corporations for the recovery of a general average deposit made in London to release cargo shipped from ports in the United States, the litigation apparently involving the application of the law of England to a fund there located, but it being claimed that limiting clauses in the bills of lading modified the liability in general average so as to put in issue the seaworthiness of the vessel at the beginning of the voyage, on which question there were American witnesses, held:
(1) It was for the district court, upon consideration of all the circumstances, to say whether it should decline jurisdiction. P. 518.
(2) In declining jurisdiction, the district court cannot be said to have improvidently exercised it discretion. Id.
(3) The question of convenience of witnesses was for the District Judge to consider and determine. Id., 33 F.2d 280, reversed.
Certiorari, 280 U.S. 545, to review a decree of the circuit court of appeals which reversed a decree of the district court declining jurisdiction of a suit in admiralty between foreigners to recover a general average deposit made in a foreign port.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd., 281 U.S. 515 (1930) in 281 U.S. 515 281 U.S. 516. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JA94EY2F1M8K3SN.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd., 281 U.S. 515 (1930), in 281 U.S. 515, page 281 U.S. 516. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JA94EY2F1M8K3SN.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Charter Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Bowring, Jones & Tidy, Ltd., 281 U.S. 515 (1930). cited in 1930, 281 U.S. 515, pp.281 U.S. 516. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JA94EY2F1M8K3SN.
|