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.
THE WEST KATAN, 1928 — 28 F.2d 638 · caselaw · US
Admiralty
THE WEST KATAN
28 F.2d 638·United States District Court for the Western District of Washington·1928
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
THE WEST KATAN.
District Court, W. D. Washington, S. D.
October 26, 1928.
No. 6206.
Bronson, Jones & Bronson, of Seattle, Wash., for Hicks-Bull Machine Co.
Huffer, Hayden, Merritt, Summers & Bucey, of Seattle, Wash., for California & Eastern S. S. Co.
[MAJORITY — CUSHMAN, District Judge]
CUSHMAN, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
It clearly appears that all of the claims asserted, not only in the libel in rem, but in both cross-libels in per-sonam, arise directly from the one transaction. The cross-libel of claimant not being limited merely to a set-off of its damage against libelant’s asserted claim, but seeking thereby to recover from libelant the total amount of its alleged damage, claimant is, in so far as the present matter is concerned, in no different situation than though it had brought the suit by libel, instead of cross-libel. By so invoking the admiralty jurisdiction in personam, cross-libelant has submitted to that jurisdiction in this matter.
The exceptions are overruled.