The Mariam

Good Law
58 F.2d 416·1932 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1196
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 7, 1932No. 4935-HCalifornia296 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hollzer, J.

The libel, in count 1 thereof, charges a violation of 46 USCA § 21, and in counts 2 and 3 charges a violation of 46 USCA § 60.

The claimant, W. C. Allen, asserts in his answer that he is a bona fide mortgagee under a mortgage executed and recorded several years after the vessel in question had been registered to the purported owner thereof, and relies upon subdivision b of subsection M and subdivision b of subsection 0 of the Ship Mortgage Act 1920, 46 USCA §§ 953 (b), 961 (b). The answer fails, however, to allege any facts showing that this incumbrance comes-within the definition of a preferred ship’s mortgage, as defined by the Ship Mortgage Act (subsection D [46 USCA § 922}).

The provisions of subsections M and O of the Ship Mortgage Act are applicable only to a preferred ship’s mortgage, as defined by that act. Assuming, without deciding, that the provisions mentioned give to a bona fide mortgagee under a preferred ship’s mortgage a prior lien as against any claim of forfeiture in a proceeding of this character, nevertheless, the mortgagee herein has failed to show that he is entitled to the benefit of these prpvisions.

No other defense being shown, the libel-ant would be…

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.