FOUR VOLUMES CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK.
6. The clause in a charter party, by which the par- ties mutually bind themselves, the ship and freight, and the merchandise to be laden on board, “in the penal sum of estimated amount of freight," to the performance of their agreements, is not a stipula tion for liquidated damages, but a penalty to secure the payment of the amount of damage that either party may actually suffer from any breach of the contract; and is to be so treated in a court of admi- ralty of the United States.
6. Under a charter party which allowed fifteen lay days for loading, the owner of the ship tendered her to the charterers, they immediately refused to ac- cept her, and thirty-six days afterward he obtained another cargo; but negotiations were pending be- tween the parties for half of that time, and the owner sustained substantial damage in a certain amount by the failure of the charterers to comply facts, and entered a decree against the charterers with their contract. The Circuit Court found these for that amount. Held, no error in law, for which the charterers could have the decree reversed in this court. 406
2. Where, by an Act of Congress, the Secretary of the Treasury is required to pay a certain claim AGENCY. against the United States, and no discretion in the premises is vested in him, the claimant is entitled to payment,and no suit lies to recover back the amount when paid on the ground of mistake, unless Con- gress abrogates the law under which payment was made.
United States v. Price,
ADMIRALTY.
SEE JURISDICTION, 5-0.
PRACTICE, 10, 11.
1. Where, in cases of collision, it appears that sig- nals were exchanged as required by Rule 2 of the Board of Supervising Inspectors of Steam Vessels, and the question of distance between the vessels at the time of such exchange of signals is not raised in the court below, it will be presumed to have been at the proper distance, as nothing appears to the contrary.
Steamboat Charles Morgan v. Kouns, 316 2. Under the operation of Admiralty Rule 24, the Circuit Court may, in its discretion, permit an amendment of the libel, so as to include a claim for damages growing out of the original cause of action and litigated in the court below, but rejected be- cause not specified in the pleadings.
Idem, 316 3. The finding of the board of local inspectors, in proceedings instituted under sec. 4450, R. S., and the
SEE JURISDICTION, 6, 8, 9. APPEAL AND ERROR.
SEE ADMIRALTY, 6.
CONFEDERATE NOTES, & COSTS, passim.
FOREIGN COINS, 3.
JUDGMENTS AND DECREES, 6. JURISDICTION, passim. NEW TRIAL.
PRACTICE, 3.
PROHIBITION, 1, 2, 6.
REMOVAL OF CAUSES, 39.
FOUR VOLUMES CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK.
1. Where, in cases of collision, it appears that sig- nals were exchanged as required by Rule 2 of the Board of Supervising Inspectors of Steam Vessels, and the question of distance between the vessels at the time of such exchange of signals is not raised in the court below, it will be presumed to have been at the proper distance, as nothing appears to the contrary.
Steamboat Charles Morgan v. Kouns, 316 2. Under the operation of Admiralty Rule 24, the Circuit Court may, in its discretion, permit an amendment of the libel, so as to include a claim for damages growing out of the original cause of action and litigated in the court below, but rejected be- cause not specified in the pleadings.
Idem, 316 3. The finding of the board of local inspectors, in proceedings instituted under sec. 4450, R. S., and the
6. The clause in a charter party, by which the par- ties mutually bind themselves, the ship and freight, and the merchandise to be laden on board, “in the penal sum of estimated amount of freight," to the performance of their agreements, is not a stipula- tion for liquidated damages, but a penalty to secure the payment of the amount of damage that either party may actually suffer from any breach of the contract; and is to be so treated in a court of admi- ralty of the United States. 406
6. Under a charter party which allowed fifteen lay days for loading, the owner of the ship tendered her to the charterers, they immediately refused to ac- cept her, and thirty-six days afterward he obtained another cargo; but negotiations were pending be- tween the parties for half of that time, and the owner sustained substantial damage in a certain amount by the failure of the charterers to comply with their contract. The Circuit Court found these facts, and entered a decree against the charterers for that amount. Held, no error in law, for which the charterers could have the decree reversed in this court.
SEE JURISDICTION, 6, 8, 9. APPEAL AND ERROR.
SEE ADMIRALTY, 6.
CONFEDERATE NOTES, & COSTS, passim.
FOREIGN COINS, 3.
JUDGMENTS AND DECREES, 6. JURISDICTION, passim. NEW TRIAL. PRACTICE, 3.
PROHIBITION, 1, 2, 6.
REMOVAL OF CAUSES, 89.
« ForrigeFortsett » |