U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1961

National Marine Service, Incorporated, (Formerly Lake Tankers Corporation) v. Barrios Bros., Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided February 9, 1961 · Tuttle, Jones, Mize

286 F.2d 573; 1961 A.M.C. 1123 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Alfred M. Farrell, Jr., New Orleans, La., Terriberry, Rault, Carroll, Martinez & Yancey, New Orleans, La., of counsel, for appellant., Cornelius G. Van Dalen, New Orleans, La., Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, New Orleans, La., of counsel, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Stella Reyes, Administratrix of the Estate of Florentino Reyes, Deceased v. Vantage Steamship Company, Inc. (5th Cir. 1980)
United Overseas Export Lines, Inc. v. Medluck Compania Maviera (5th Cir. 1986)
United Overseas Export Lines, Inc. v. Medluck Compania Maviera, S.A. (5th Cir. 1986)
Apac-Arkansas, Inc. v. Tugboat Melissa L (United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas 1985)
Allied Chemical Corp. v. Hess Tankship Co. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1979)
Hogge v. SS YORKMAR (District Court, D. Maryland 1977)
Placid Oil Company v. SS WILLOWPOOL (District Court, E.D. Texas 1963)

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.

The lugger, Young Thelma, owned and operated by the appellee, sank in the Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River as a result of a collision with a tug and barge of the appellant. The district court determined that the collision was caused by the fault of the tug and barge and allowed full recovery to the appellee for the loss of the lugger. Barrios Bros., Inc. v. Lake Tankers Corporation, D.C., 188 F.Supp. 300. The district court made justifiable findings on conflicting evidence. No question except as to the sufficiency of the evidence is submitted. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

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