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.
Liverpool and Great Western Steam Company v. Insurance Company of North America, 1888 — 129 U.S. 464 · caselaw · US
General
Liverpool and Great Western Steam Company v. Insurance Company of North America
129 U.S. 46432 L. Ed. 800·Supreme Court of the United States·1888
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller a,nd Mr. Justice Lamar were not members of the court when this case was argued, .and took no part' in its decision.
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
Liverpool and Great Western Steam Company v. Insurance Company of North America.
No. 6.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.
[MAJORITY]
This case was argued and decided with that of Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix Ins. Co., supra, and was substantial^ like it,, except that the through bills of lading were for transportation by the New York .Central and Hudson River Railroad Company and the Guión Line Steamship Company from Buffalo in the State of New York to Liverpool via New York. The Circuit Court’s findings of •fact, conclusions of law and opinion are printed in 22 Blatchford, 372, and in 22 Fed. Rep. 715.
Decree affirmed.
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller a,nd Mr. Justice Lamar were not members of the court when this case was argued, .and took no part' in its decision.