CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL & PACIFIC R. CO.

v.

O'CONNOR, ADMINISTRATRIX

Citator

Cited By

• Complaint of TUG Ocean Prince, Inc. v. United States, 584 F.2d 1151 (2d Cir. 1978)
  …well equipped for the intended voyage and manned by a competent and skillful master of sound judgment and discretion. The Niagara v. Cordes, 62 U.S. (21 How.) 7, 16 L.Ed. 41 (1859); The Framlington Court, 69 F. 2d 300, 304 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 292 U.S. 651, 54 S.Ct. 860, 78 L.Ed. 1500 (1934); Adams v. Bortz, 279 F. 521 (2d Cir. 1922); Northern Commercial Co. v. Lindblom, 162 F. 250 (9th Cir. 1908). The burden to prove seaworthiness and the exercise of due diligence to make the ship seaworthy is upon t…
• Nitram, Inc. v. Motor Vessel Cretan Life, 599 F.2d 1359 (5th Cir. 1979)
• Hagans v. United States, 261 F.2d 924 (5th Cir. 1958)
  …77 L.Ed. 413, and in line with the decisions of this Court. E.G., Kott v. United States, 5 Cir., 1947, 163 F. 2d 984, certiorari denied 333 U.S. 837, 68 S.Ct. 609, 92 L.Ed. 1122; Jindra v. United States, 5 Cir., 1934, 69 F. 2d 429, certiorari denied 292 U.S. 651, 54 S.Ct. 869, 78 L.Ed. 1501; and cf. Hamilton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1955, 221 F. 2d 611. . The substance of this charge is well summarized in this excerpt: “It is the duty of every juror to consult with every other juror and reach a mutual und…