Sullivan

Sullivan v. Dollar S. S. Line

Good Law
17 F.2d 206·1927 A.M.C. 266·1927 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 955
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 1927Nos. 19079, 19081California701 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kerrigan, J.

Libels for cargo damage have been filed against the vessels Stuart Dollar and Melville Dollar. The answers filed set up the defense that the shipment moved forward under bills of lading purporting to exempt the carrier frdm liability from mold, sweat, and decay, and alleging that due diligence was used to make the vessels seaworthy, and that she was in fact seaworthy. Libelants now move for an order directing respondents to permit them to inspect the Stuart Dollar, for the purpose “of examining and inspecting and photographing, if deemed advisable, the cargo - spaces in which the libelant’s cargo, which is the subject of this litigation, was carried, and the ventilating systems used therein.”

The affidavits in support of this motion give as the reason for procuring an inspection that “libelant deemed it essential to be prepared to offer evidence, if relevant, as to the exact condition of the said vessel, and to be fully informed as to said condition, in order to intelligently consider any relevant evidence which might be offered by respondents in support of the allegations of said answer at the hearing of this cause.” Neither the admiralty rules of the Supreme Court nor those of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.