MORRIS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (12 total)

• Reddick v. McALLISTER Lighterage Line, Inc., 258 F.2d 297 (2d Cir. 1958)
  …Pan-Atlantic Steamship Corp., 350 U.S. 124, 76 S.Ct. 232, 100 L.Ed. 133; Curtis v. A. Garcia y Cia, 3 Cir., 241 F. 2d 30; Amador v. A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi, 2 Cir., 224 F. 2d 437, certiorari denied A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi v. Amador, 350 U.S. 901, 76 S. Ct. 179, 100 L.Ed. 791. The holding of unseaworthiness may also be predicated on the latent defect in the cargo-crate. For if a shipowner is held liable for injury caused by defects in gear brought aboard by the unloading stevedore, Alaska S…
• United States v. Kabot, 295 F.2d 848 (2d Cir. 1961)
  …tness. It made known to the defense that Gillis was available and that it did not intend to call him. Under the circumstances it was for the defense to call him or not as it chose. Cenedella v. United States, 224 F. 2d 778 (1 Cir.1955), cert. denied 350 U.S. 901, 76 S.Ct. 179, 100 L.Ed. 791. Under the circumstances here, where the evidence presented left Gillis’ part in the affair obscure, it might have been desirable for the court to call him. Compare United States v. Lutwak, 195 F. 2d 748 (7 Cir.1952), a…
• A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi v. Commercial Stevedoring Co., Inc., 256 F.2d 227 (2d Cir. 1958)
  …uries. On appeal, however, we determined that despite Commercial’s negligence Mowinckels was liable to the longshoreman. Amador v. A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi, 2 Cir., 224 F. 2d 437, certiorari denied A/S J. Ludwig Mo-winckels Rederi v. Amador, 350 U.S. 901, 76 S.Ct. 179, 100 L.Ed. 791. The findings of the district court quoted in that opin-. ion showed that Mowinckles had loaded the cargo in question in such a manner as to make the stow only “conditionally proper,” i.e., it was improper unless certai…