C. A. LEEPER COMPANY ET AL.

v.

LEMON G. NEELY COMPANY ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Nichimen Co., Inc. v. Farland, 462 F.2d 319 (2d Cir. 1972)
  …” is neither a “bill of lading” nor a “shipping document” within the meaning of those sections but, in so doing, reasoned that “sections [1 and 2] manifestly refer to common carriers . . . .”, The G. R. Crowe, 2 Cir., 294 F. 506, 508, cert. denied, 264 U.S. 586, 44 S.Ct. 335, 68 L.Ed. 862 (1923).3 See generally Knauth, supra, at 176-79. The enacting clause of COGSA, adopted in 1936, provides that it shall regulate rights and liabilities under “[e]very bill of lading or similar document of title which is e…
• In re the Vessel Marine Sulphur Queen. Marine Sulphur Transp. Corp., 460 F.2d 89 (2d Cir. 1972)
  …ng operates as the receipt for the goods, and as a document of title passing the property of the goods, but not as varying the contract between the charterer and the shipowner.” See also, The G. R. Crowe, 294 F. 506, 508 (2 Cir. 1923), cert. denied 264 U.S. 586, 44 S.Ct. 335, 68 L.Ed. 862 (1924); The Iona, 80 F. 933 (5 Cir. 1897); Ministry of Commerce v. Marine Tankers Corp., 194 F.Supp. 161, 162-163 (S.D.N.Y.1960). The fact that the parties intended this result is borne out quite clearly by ¶ 29 of the ch…
• United States Shipping Bd. Emergency Fleet Corp. v. Rosenberg Bros. & Co., 12 F.2d 721 (9th Cir. 1926)
  …y against the agent that did the wrongful act. In re Eastern Shore Shipbuilding Corporation, U. S. Shipping Board, etc., v. Wood (D. C.) 274 F. 893; Providence Engineering Corp. v. Downey Shipbuilding Corp. (C. C. A.) 294 F. 641; certiorari denied 264 U. S. 586, 44 S. Ct. 334, 68 L. Ed. 862; The Panola (C. C. A.) 9 F.(2d) 733, 1925 A. M. C. 1173; United States Shipbuilding Corp., etc., v. Banque Russo Asiatique (C. C. A.) 286 F. 918; Smith v. U. S. Shipping Board, etc. (D. C.) 2 F.(2d) 390. [8] We mus…