Duane

Duane v. Goodall

Good Law
7 F. Cas. 1132·1863 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 7, 1863California2,427 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hoffman, J.

The principal allegations of the libel, and that the facts therein stated constitute a marine tort, for which this court has jurisdiction to award damages, are admitted.

It is objected (1) that the demand is barred by prescription, or that it has become stale. In the admiralty there is no fixed limitation •of time within which suits must be brought. The court will not, it is true, entertain stale demands, but it is left to the discretion of the court to pronounce whether, in view of all circumstances of each particular case, the demand be so stale as to be deemed neglected and abandoned. Pars. Mar. Law, 665; Ben. Adm. §§ 574, 575. It is unnecessary to detail all the circumstances of this case at bar. They are such as, in my judgment, are abundantly sufficient to account for and excuse the long interval which elapsed between the commission of the wrongs complained of and the institution of the suit.

The second exception of the respondent presents a much graver objection. It -sets up, in substance, that the libelant has already sued and obtained judgment against James Watkins, master, and - Watson, mate, of the Golden Age, for the tort now complained of, and that that judgment has…

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.