Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Bartle DALY, Libelant-Appellee, v. THE Steam Tag OVERBROOK, Her Engines, etc., Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Claimant-Appellee, THE Steam Tug PANTHER, Her Engines, etc., Fred B. Dalzeil, Claimant-Appellant, 1932 — 59 F.2d 1057 · caselaw · US
General
Bartle DALY, Libelant-Appellee, v. THE Steam Tag OVERBROOK, Her Engines, etc., Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Claimant-Appellee, THE Steam Tug PANTHER, Her Engines, etc., Fred B. Dalzeil, Claimant-Appellant
59 F.2d 1057·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1932
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Bartle DALY, Libelant-Appellee, v. THE Steam Tag OVERBROOK, Her Engines, etc., Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Claimant-Appel-lee, THE Steam Tug PANTHER, Her Engines, etc., Fred B. Dalzeil, Claimant-Appellant.
No. 435.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 6, 1932.
Thomas A. McDonald, of New York City, for libelant.
Park, Lynch & Hagen, of New York City (Anthony V. Lynch, Jr., and Charles W. Hagen, both of New York City, of counsel), for The Panther.
Burlingham, Veeder, Fearey, Clark & Hupper, of New York City (Chauncey L Clark and Paul Tison, both of New York City, of counsel), for The Overbrook.
Before MANTON, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PEE CUEIAM.]
PEE CUEIAM.
Decree affirmed.