Case ID: f_265/html/1019-02.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

THE LOUISE RUGGE.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    July 6, 1920.)
    No. 2557.
    Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey; Charles F. Lynch, Judge. In Admiralty. Suit for collision by George W. Scott and another against the steam tug Louise Rugge, Tice Tugging Line, claimant, and the Board of Chosen Freeholders of Middlesex County, New Jersey. Decree for libelants against the Louise Rugge, and claimant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Park & Mattison, of New York City (Henry E. Mattison, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.. Foley & Martin, of New York City (George V. A. McCloskey, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee. Macldin, Brown, Purdy & Van Wyck, of New York City (William F. Purdy, of New York City, of counsel), for libelant appellees.
    Before BUFFINGTON and WOOLLEY, Circuit Judges, and DICKINSON, District Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

This collision case involved no legal principles, but turned wholly on a question of fact. On that question of fact the experienced Judge below cited, discussed and passed upon the evidence in an extensive opinon •which adequately covered every phase of the case. As we have said, no principle is involved; the case is simply one of its own facts; it forms no precedent. An opinion by this Court would simply be an attempt to state and record in different words what has been thoroughly done by the Court below. We therefore restrict ourselves to saying we have examined the proofs and we agree with the Court below. Accordingly, we affirm its decree.