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.
H. LISSNER & CO., Inc., v. OCEANIC STEAM NAV. CO., Limited, 1929 — 30 F.2d 290 · caselaw · US
Admiralty
H. LISSNER & CO., Inc., v. OCEANIC STEAM NAV. CO., Limited
30 F.2d 290·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1929
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
H. LISSNER & CO., Inc., v. OCEANIC STEAM NAV. CO., Limited.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
January 7, 1929.
No. 136.
Harry D. Thirkield, of New York City, for appellant.
Burlingham, Veeder, Masten & Fearey, of New York City (Ray Rood Allen and Norman M. Barron, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from an alleged interlocutory decree which provides as follows:
“Ordered, that libelant’s said damages be computed on the basis 'of the $100 per package clause contained in the bill of lading set forth in the libel, and not on any higher basis: Provided, however, that the allegations of said libel which have not been admitted by respondent in its answer be duly established before the commissioner by stipulation between the parties or by proof.”
Such a determination is not an interlocutory decree in admiralty, determining the rights and liabilities of the parties as the statute provides. 44 Stat. L. 233 (28 USCA § 227). It.is not now reviewable. The correctness of such an order may not be tested until the rights and liabilities of the parties have been determined, leaving only the question of damages for determination.
Appeal dismissed.