MARTIN
v.
HAZARD POWDER COMPANY
Mr. Chief Justice
Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
We held in Jerome v. McCarter, 21 Wall. 17, after much consideration, that if, “after the security has been accepted, the circumstances of the case, or of the parties, or of the sureties upon the bond, have changed, so that security which, at the time it was taken, was good and sufficient, does not continue to be so, we might, upon a proper application, so adjudge and order as justice might require. But upon facts existing at the time the security was accepted, the action of the justice, within the statute and the rules of practice adopted for his guidance, is final.”
The showing made in this case does not satisfy us that the alleged insufficiency of the security taken when the writ of error was sued out, arises from any change in the circumstances of the sureties since the acceptance and approval of the bond.
Motion denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (43 total)
-
Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp., 342 U.S. 282 (U.S. 1952)…; Hitaffer v, Argonne Co., 87 U. S. App. D. C. 57, 183 F. 2d 811. The North Star, 106 U. S. 17, 21, traces the doctrine back to the Rules of Oleron and the laws of Wisbuy. See also, The Washington, 9 Wall. 513; The Alabama, 92 U. S. 695; The Atlas, 93 U. S. 302; The Chattahoochee, 173 U. S. 540, 551-555. American Stevedores, Inc. v. Porello, 330 U. S. 446, recognized that some lower federal courts had applied the equal-division rule of contribution in non-collision cases. The opinion in that case implied…
-
Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 443 U.S. 256 (U.S. 1979)…ip Ceiling & Refitting Corp., 342 U. S. 282, 283 (1952) (shipowner responsible for 25% of negligence required to pay 100% of damages, and contribution unavailable from negligent shoreside contractor, an employer under the Act). See also The Atlas, 93 U. S. 302 (1876); The Juniata, 93 U. S. 337 (1876). We stated the common-law rale in The Atlas and adopted it as part of admiralty jurisprudence: “Nothing is more clear than the right of a plaintiff, having suffered such a loss, to sue in a common-law actio…1 / 2
-
Cooper Stevedoring Co., Inc. v. Fritz Kopke, Inc., 417 U.S. 106 (U.S. 1974)…ctrine to encompass not only damage to the vessels involved in a collision, but personal injuries and property damage caused innocent third parties as well. See, e. g., The Washington, 9 Wall. 513 (1870); The Alabama, 92 U. S. 695 (1876); The Atlas, 93 U. S. 302 (1876); The Chattahoochee, 173 U. S. 540 (1899). See generally The Max Morris, 137 U. S. 1, 8-11 (1890). In other cases, the Court has recognized the application of the rule of divided damages in circumstances not involving a collision between t…
Previewing 3 of 43 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jerome v. McCarter, 21 Wall. 17 (U.S. 1874)