Case ID: f_212/html/0396-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SUDERMAN & DOLSON v. FREDERICK LEYLAND & CO., Limited.
    Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    February 17, 1914.
    Rehearing Denied March 31, 1914.
    No. 2572.
    Towage (§ 18) — Collision Between Tug and Steamship — Fault.
    A decree affirmed which found a steamship without fault for a collision with a tug, which was attempting to take a towline from the steamship.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Towage, Cent. Dig. § 40; Dec. Dig. § 18.
    
    Collision with or between tbwing vessels and vessels in tow, see note to The John Englis, 100 C. C. A. 581.]
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas; Waller T. Burns, Judge.
    Suit in admiralty for collision by Suderman & Dolson, owners of the tug Ima Hogg, against Frederick Deyland & Co., Dimited, owner of the steamship Alexandrian. Decree for respondent, and libelants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    John C. Walker and James B. Stubbs, both of Galveston, Tex., for appellant.
    Mart H. Royston, of Galveston, Tex., fop appellee.
    
      Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
    
      
       For other oases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 2907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

This is a libel for damages caused by a collision between the steam tug Ima Hogg and the steamship Alexandrian, the tug at the time being engaged in an effort to take a towline from the steamship. On the evidence, practically admitted without objection, the District Court found that the steamship Alexandrian was without fault in the premises, and dismissed the libel.

We have read and considered the evidence in the transcript, and we conclude that the decree of the District Court finding the Alexandrian without fault in the premises is fully sustained thereby. See The Alaska (C. C.) 33 Fed. 107; The Minnehaha, 124 Fed. 210, 59 C. C. A. 674.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.