U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1954

O. & Y. Nuri v. The Johanna the Cuma

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 27, 1954 · Parker, Soper, Dobie

210 F.2d 261; 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2430; 1954 A.M.C. 440 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

William G. Symmers, New York City (John W. Oast, Jr., Norfolk, Va., Dow & Symmers, and David II. Batchelder, Jr., New York City, on the brief), for appellant., Michael B. Wagenheim, Norfolk, Va. (Hill Rivkins, Middleton, Louis & War-burton, and George B. Warburton, New York City, on the brief), for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. Frederick Springer (4th Cir. 2013)
Spero v. Steamship the Argodon (District Court, E.D. Virginia 1957)
Samad v. the Steamship Etivebank (District Court, E.D. Virginia 1955)
Anglo-American Grain Co. v. the S/T Mina D'Amico (District Court, E.D. Virginia 1959)
Giatilis v. the Steam Tanker Darnie (District Court, D. Maryland 1959)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing a suit in admiralty brought by the owners of a Turkish vessel which was sunk as the result of a collision with a German vessel in the North Sea. The appellant has produced in this court evidence which was not before the District Court as to the availability of witnesses to establish the cause of the collision, a matter which seems to have had considerable weight with the District Judge in arriving at his decision in a case of which he might otherwise very properly have taken jurisdiction. We shall accordingly vacate the decree appealed from and remand the case to the District Court in order that the District Judge may exercise his discretion with respect to accepting jurisdiction in the light of the evidence produced in this court and of any further evidence that may be produced before him, and of the principles of law *262 properly applicable in the premises. See The Belgenland, 114 U.S. 355, 5 S.Ct. 860, 29 L.Ed. 152; Heredia v. Davies, 4 Cir., 12 F.2d 500; and The Fletero v. Arias, 4 Cir., 206 F.2d 267.

Decree vacated and case remanded with directions.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.