DOROTHY LEE
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1926-11-29
No. 718
273 U.S. 736 Supreme Court of the United States (1926) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Scheibel v. Agwilines, Inc., 156 F.2d 636 (2d Cir. 1946)
    …after the year had elapsed would be ineffective as a waiver. See W. R. Grace & Co. v. Panama R. Co., 2 Cir, 12 F. 2d 338, 340, certiorari denied 273 U.S. 715, 47 S.Ct. 108, 71 L.Ed. 855; The Texas Maru, 2 Cir., 13 F. 2d 538, 541, certiorari denied 273 U.S. 736, 47 S.Ct. 244, 71 L.Ed. 866. Hence, if federal law is to be applied, the conversation was irrelevant. If, as the appellant contends, we must apply New York law, he fares no better, because the ticket contained a provision that “No agent, employee…
  • …ertiorari denied 273 U. S. 715, 47 S. Ct. 108, 71 L. Ed. 855; Cudahy Packing Co. v. Munson S. S. Co. (C. C. A.) 22 F.(2d) 898, certiorari denied 277 U. S. 586, 48 S. Ct. 433, 72 L. Ed. 1000; The Texas Maru (C. C. A.) 13 F.(2d) 538, certiorari denied 273 U. S. 736, 47 S. Ct. 244, 71 L. Ed. 866. The libelant contends that the British “Carriage of Goods by Sea Act” (Parliament of Great Britain, 1924, 14 and 15 Geo V. C. 22) applies because the bill of lading states that, “This contract shall he governed by Eng…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw