|
|
Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 285 U.S. 413 (1932)
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.
Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 285 U.S. 413 (1932)
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 285 U.S. 393, click here.
Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd. No. 487 Argued February 25, 1932 Decided April 11, 1932 * 285 U.S. 413
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. In a suit in admiralty between foreigners, it is ordinarily within the discretion of the district court to refuse to retain jurisdiction, and the exercise of its discretion will not be disturbed unless abused. P. 418.
2. This rule applies even though the cause of action arose in this country. Pp. 418-419.
3. Two ships of Canadian registry and ownership, each carrying cargo shipped from one Canadian port to another, collided on Lake Superior while unintentionally in United States waters, and one ship sank. While suit was pending in a Canadian court of admiralty to determine liability as between the ships, libels in personam against the owner of one of them were filed by cargo owners in a federal district court in New York. All the parties were citizens of Canada, and the officers and crew of each vessel -- the material witnesses -- were citizens and residents of that country. Opposing affidavits alleged that the motive of the cargo owners in coming to a court of the United States lay in the opportunity in our law to recover full damages from the noncarrying vessel, whereas, in Canada, the liability would be divided equally between the two vessels if both were at fault. The district court dismissed the libels, but ordered that the respondent should appear and file security in any action which might be instituted by the libelants in the admiralty courts of Canada, so that they would not, by dismissal of the libels, lose the security gained by foreign attachment.
Held that the refusal to retain jurisdiction was not an abuse of discretion. P. 423.
51 F.2d 1007 affirmed.
Certiorari, 284 U.S. 612, to review the affirmance of decrees dismissing three libels in admiralty. 49 F.2d 802, 804.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 285 U.S. 413 (1932) in 285 U.S. 413 285 U.S. 414–285 U.S. 417. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=KZTP3MU2MAY1Q63.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 285 U.S. 413 (1932), in 285 U.S. 413, pp. 285 U.S. 414–285 U.S. 417. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=KZTP3MU2MAY1Q63.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Canada Malting Co., Ltd. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 285 U.S. 413 (1932). cited in 1932, 285 U.S. 413, pp.285 U.S. 414–285 U.S. 417. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=KZTP3MU2MAY1Q63.
|