Admiralty. Jurisdiction. Equitable Jurisdiction. Accountings

Download Admiralty. Jurisdiction. Equitable Jurisdiction. Accountings

Post on 10-Jan-2017




1 download

Embed Size (px)


  • Admiralty. Jurisdiction. Equitable Jurisdiction. AccountingsSource: Harvard Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 6 (Apr., 1920), p. 858Published by: The Harvard Law Review AssociationStable URL: .Accessed: 23/05/2014 11:07

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

    .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact


    The Harvard Law Review Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toHarvard Law Review.

    This content downloaded from on Fri, 23 May 2014 11:07:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


    argument in favor of the result is that it prevents duplication of legal proceed- ings. In the principal case, the result is reached without injustice. The claims of the parties arose in the same transaction, and both would require the same evidence and witnesses. Both parties have evinced their readiness to bring their cases to trial at this time. But the decision cannot be supported on au- thority. See Woody v. Jordan, 69 N. C. i89; Asher v. Reizenstein, I05 N. C. 2I3, i0 S. E. 889. And a general application of a rule compelling counter- claim would be unjust. A plaintiff is not compelled to join two causes of action against the same defendant. Brunsden v. Humphrey, I4 Q. B. D. I4I; Reilly v. Sicilian Asphalt Paving Co., I70 N. Y. 40, 62 N. E. 772. There would seem an even greater hardship in always compelling a defendant to try his cross action at the place of the plaintiff's choosing.

    ADMIRALTY - JURISDICTION - EQUITABLE JURISDICTION - ACCOUNTINGS. - By the terms of a charter party, a demise of two ships for a term of years,

    the charterer was to pay the owner a certain sum each month and one half the net earnings after deducting these sums. At the end of the period the char- terer was to return the ships in good repair with an equal amount of furniture and apparel. In a libel for the breach of the charter party it appeared that an accounting was incidentally involved. Held, that admiralty has jurisdic- tion. Metropolitan S. S. Co. v. Pacific-Alaska Navigation Co., 260 Fed. 973 (Dist. Ct. S. D. Me.).

    In adjusting the rights of litigants, courts of admiralty proceed on equitable principles. They may deny full recovery to a sailor guilty of misconduct dur- ing the voyage in which the wages in dispute were earned. Macomber v. Thompson, i Sumn. 384. And they may refuse to entertain libels in tort for assault when the libellants because of their wrongful conduct could recover only trivial damages. Barnett v. Luther, i Curtis, 434. Where, however, the relief asked in its nature involves the exercise of equitable jurisdiction, ad- miralty refuses to act. It does not, therefore, entertain a bill for the refor- mation of an instrument. Williams v. Prov. Co., 56 Fed. I59. Nor does it adjudicate a libel brought mainly for an accounting, however simple. Martin v. Walker, Abb. Adm. 579; The Zillah May, 22i Fed. ioi6. But if the account- ing is incidental to the main cause of action, maritime in nature, admiralty gives complete relief, even if, as in the principal case, the accounting seems complex. The Emma B., I40 Fed. 77I. On principle, there is no reason why admiralty, in spite of its pride in its simple procedure, should make this dis- tinction. Indeed, admiralty is obviously a court better fitted than equity to take jurisdiction of accountings arising out of maritime transactions. How- ever, this distinction seems firmly established by judicial decision.

    APPEAL AND ERROR - APPELLANT'S RIGHT OF DISMISSAL DENIED WHERE PREJUDICIAL TO APPELLEE. - The plaintiff in a replevin suit appealed from an adverse judgment in a county court to the district court. By statute the latter court had jurisdiction to try the cause de novo. (I907 NEB. CoMwP. STAT., ? 75I4.) By an order of the district court, he also regained possession of the chattel which had been restored to the defendant by execution on the county court's judgment. Five months later, the plaintiff, against the objec- tion of the defendant, moved to dismiss the appeal and claimed an absolute right to have the motion granted. There is a statute providing that an ap- pellant may dismiss without the consent of the appellee at any time before submission. (I9I3 NEB. REV. STAT., ? 8547.) Held, that the motion to dis- miss be denied. Lemer v. Hunyak, 175 N. W. 605 (Neb.).

    Even in the absence of statute, the appellant has a right to have his appeal dismissed. Hart v. Minneapolis, St. Paul, etc. Ry. Co., I22 Wis. 308, 99 N. W. ioi9; Derick v. Taylor, I7I Mass. 444, 5o N. E. I038. But this right is sub-

    This content downloaded from on Fri, 23 May 2014 11:07:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    Article Contentsp. 858

    Issue Table of ContentsHarvard Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 6 (Apr., 1920), pp. 747-884A Contemporary State Trial: The United States versus Jacob Abrams et al. [pp. 747-774]Federal Power to Own and Operate Railroads in Peace Time [pp. 775-793]The Sixteenth Amendment [pp. 794-812]The Progress of the Law, 1918-1919 Equity (Continued) [pp. 813-837]NotesState Regulation of Prices under the Fourteenth Amendment [pp. 838-840]Extraterritorial Enforcement of Inheritance Tax by Suit against Beneficiaries [pp. 840-843]Is Homicide Committed Where the Blow Is Struck or Where the Death Occurs? [pp. 843-845]Are Bonuses to Soldiers and Sailors Given for a Public Purpose? [pp. 846-848]Estoppel of an Attorney to Act against His Client [pp. 848-850]A Judgment as Evidence in a Later Proceeding [pp. 850-852]A Partnership and a Joint Adventure Distinguished [pp. 852-854]Obligation of Aggrieved Contracting Party to Accept New Offer of Defaulter to Obviate Avoidable Damage [pp. 854-857]

    Recent CasesAbatement. Pendency of an Action in Which Present Claim Might Be Set up as Counterclaim [pp. 857-858]Admiralty. Jurisdiction. Equitable Jurisdiction. Accountings [p. 858]Appeal and Error. Appellant's Right of Dismissal Denied Where Prejudicial to Appellee [pp. 858-859]Attorneys. Relation between Attorney and Client. Advice of Attorney to a Deserter as Assistance under a Statute [p. 859]Attorneys. Relation between Attorney and Client. Proceeding in Quo Warranto Dismissed Because State's Attorney Disqualified [pp. 859-860]Bankruptcy. Property Passing to Trustee. Right of Action for Tort Causing Personal and Property Damage [p. 860]Bankruptcy. Property Passing to the Trustee in Bankruptcy. Right to Recover Securities Pledged for a Usurious Loan [pp. 860-861]Conflict of Laws. Concurrent Jurisdiction. Rule of Federal Courts as to Burden of Proof Applied in an Action in a State Court under a Federal Statute [p. 861]Constitutional Law. Due Process. Regulation of Prices [pp. 861-862]Constructive Trusts. Mistake of Fact. Money Loaned in Ignorance of the Previous Institution of Bankruptcy Proceedings against the Borrower [p. 862]Corporations. Liability of Stockholder upon Subscription-Calls. Whether Date of Payment Necessary for Validity of Resolution for a Call [pp. 862-863]Damages. Measure of Damages. Duty of Innocent Party to Accept Offer of Defaulting Party in Mitigation of Damages [p. 863]Domicile. Evidence of Intent to Change as between Two Residences [pp. 863-864]Equity. Jurisdiction. Adequacy of Legal Remedy Where There Is a Recovery in Quasi-Contract. Account [p. 864]Evidence. General Principles and Rules of Exclusion. Evidence of Trailing of Accused by Bloodhounds [pp. 864-865]Evidence. Statements in Public Documents. Admissibility of Census Report [p. 865]Fraudulent Conveyances. Rights of Creditors. Tort Claimants as Creditors within the Statute. Time of Accrual of Right to Attack the Conveyance [pp. 865-866]Grand Jury. Selection of Members. Effect of Exemption of Jurors by Court on Its Own Motion [p. 866]Husband and Wife. Community Property. Right of Wife to Sue for Injuries When Husband Refuses to Join [p. 867]Indictment and Information. Sufficiency of Accusation. Necessity of Allegation of Specific Instances of Practicing without a License [pp. 867-868]Joint Adventures. Fiduciary Relation between Co-Adventurers. Duty to Divide Secret Profits [p. 868]Liens. Priority of Common-Law Lien over Conditional Vendor's Lien [pp. 868-869]Partnership. Rights of Partners inter se. Fiduciary Relation after Dissolution [p. 869]Searches and Seizures. Validity of Judicial Order Requiring Production of Papers Discovered by Unlawful Search [pp. 869-870]Statute of Frauds. Sales of Goods, Wares, and Merchandise. Check as Part Payment [p. 870]Taxation. Inheritance Tax. Collection and Enforcement. Personal Action in Another State against the Beneficiaries [p. 870]Torts. Liability of Occupier of Premises. Lessee Liable for Injuries to Invitee on Portion of Premises Not Covered by Lease [p. 871]War. Suit by Alien Enemy. Effect of Payment of Judgment to Alien Property Custodian [pp. 871-872]Waters. Navigability. Necessity of Actual User [p. 872]Wills. Republication. Incorporation by Reference. Valid Codicil Referring to Will Procured by Undue Influence [pp. 872-873]Witnesses. Privilege of Husband and Wife. Use for Purpose of Impeachment of Testimony


View more >