|
|
Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn, 354 U.S. 147 (1957)
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.
Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn, 354 U.S. 147 (1957)
Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn No. 445 Argued May 6, 1957 Decided June 10, 1957 354 U.S. 147
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Petitioner brought this proceeding in a Federal District Court under the Limited Liability Act, 46 U.S.C. §§ 181-196, to limit its liability for claims growing out of a collision between petitioner’s tug and barge and a pleasure yacht. Suits previously brought in state courts, by respondent for the death of her husband, and by four other claimants for personal injuries and the loss of the yacht, originally involved claims for damages aggregating more than the value of petitioner’s vessels and their pending freight, but the aggregate amount recoverable on such claims was reduced by stipulations and admiralty court orders to an amount less than the value of the vessels and their pending freight. The value of the vessels was undisputed; the claims were fixed; there was no contention that there might be further claims; the fund indubitably was sufficient to pay all claims in full; and the admiralty court had dissolved its injunction against respondent’s suit in the state court.
Held: in this situation, a concursus beyond that required by the orders heretofore entered in the limitation proceeding is not necessary, and respondent may proceed with her suit in the state court to determine petitioner’s obligation to respond in damages for the loss of her husband’s life subject to the continuing jurisdiction of the federal court to protect petitioner’s right to limited liability. Pp. 148-154.
(a) Where the fund paid into the proceedings by the offending owner exceeds the claims made against it, there is no necessity for the maintenance of the concourse. P. 152.
(b) The Act is not one of immunity from liability, and it confers no privilege on the shipowner other than that granting him limited liability. Pp. 152-153.
(c) In view of the reservation to such suitors of their common law remedies by 28 U.S. C. § 1333, respondent must not be thwarted in her attempt to employ her common law remedy in the state court, where she may obtain trial by jury. P. 153.
(d) Maryland Casualty Co. v. Cushing, 347 U.S. 409, distinguished. Pp. 153-154.
232 F.2d 573, 235 F.2d 783, affirmed.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn, 354 U.S. 147 (1957) in 354 U.S. 147 354 U.S. 148. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=MLER4YEFRRMPZFD.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn, 354 U.S. 147 (1957), in 354 U.S. 147, page 354 U.S. 148. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=MLER4YEFRRMPZFD.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Lake Tankers Corp. v. Henn, 354 U.S. 147 (1957). cited in 1957, 354 U.S. 147, pp.354 U.S. 148. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=MLER4YEFRRMPZFD.
|