Talk:The Packer Scully v. New Jersey Lighterage Company/Opinion of the Court
Add topic
|
This page is part of a WikiProject to improve the United States Supreme Court case pages. To participate see the project page. |
| Information about this edition | |
|---|---|
| Edition: | The Packer Scully v. New Jersey Lighterage Company, by the New Jersey Lighterage Company, appellee, owner of the barge Atlanta, against the steam-tug Dr John Wolverton, which had the Atlanta in tow, and also against the steam-tug E A Packer, to recover damages for a collision between the Atlanta and a barge lashed along-side and in tow of the Packer, on her port side, known as 'Cross Creek Barge No 5,' which occurred in the afternoon of October 25, 1880, near the mouth of the East river, in the harbor of New York Service never having been obtained upon the Wolverton, the case proceeded against the Packer, and in the district court a decree was granted dismissing the libel upon the ground that the Wolverton was solely at fault for the collision 20 Fed Rep 327 Upon appeal to the circuit court, this decree was reversed upon the ground that the collision was partly at least the fault of the Packer, and that, under the rulings of this court, the libelant was entitled to recover its entire damages against her, which amounted, with interest, to $5,40431, for which a decree was rendered against her . |
| Source: | The Packer Scully v. New Jersey Lighterage Company from http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/US/140 |
| Contributor(s): | BenchBot |
| Level of progress: | Text being edited 
|
| Notes: | Gathered and wikified using an automated tool. See this documentation for more information. |
Start a discussion about The Packer Scully v. New Jersey Lighterage Company/Opinion of the Court
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikisource the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve The Packer Scully v. New Jersey Lighterage Company/Opinion of the Court.
