From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barwick v. Toomey

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 19, 1936
83 F.2d 1006 (3d Cir. 1936)

Opinion

No. 5865.

May 19, 1936.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey.

Charles W. Hagen, of New York City (Henry C. Eidenbach, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

McDermott, Enright Carpenter, of Jersey City, N.J., and Macklin, Brown, Lenahan Speer, of New York City (Horace L. Cheyney, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before BUFFINGTON, DAVIS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.


This admiralty collision case depends on its own particular facts and the substantive questions of fact involved are: Did the tug Barwick, in passing out of the pier, strike the motor vessel Spray, lying at rest, and, if so, did the blow cause the damage found, assessed, and decreed? After hearing the witnesses of both sides, the court entered a decree against the Barwick and referred the case to a master to ascertain damages, who heard testimony and reported the same. On hearing exceptions thereto, the court entered a final decree dismissing such exceptions and confirming his report.

The proofs and all questions raised have had full consideration and, finding no reversible error, we limit ourselves, in view of the pressure of work of this court, to affirming the decree below without discussing the proofs.


Summaries of

Barwick v. Toomey

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 19, 1936
83 F.2d 1006 (3d Cir. 1936)
Case details for

Barwick v. Toomey

Case Details

Full title:BARWICK, Inc., Claimant of THE Steamtug BARWICK, Appellant, v. William F…

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: May 19, 1936

Citations

83 F.2d 1006 (3d Cir. 1936)