Matson Nav. Co. v. United States, 284 U.S. 352 (1931)

U.S. Supreme Court, (December 09, 1931)

Docket number: 137

/us/284/352/case.html
Permanent Link: http://supreme.vlex.com/vid/20016852
Id. vLex: VLEX-20016852

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Request manual translation

Search in this document

Document options

Sponsored Ads:

RSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Southwest Marine of San Francisco, Inc., Appellant, v. the United States, Appellee., 896 F.2d 532 (Fed. Cir. 1990)

U.S. Supreme Court - Keene Corp. v. United States, 508 U.S. 200 (1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Unr Industries, Inc., Unarco Industries, Inc. and Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. the United States, Defendant-Appellee. Keene Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States, Defendant-Appellee., 911 F.2d 654 (Fed. Cir. 1990)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Richard Wayne Trautman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Buck Steber, Inc., Et Al., Defendants, United States of America, Defendant-Appellee., 693 F.2d 440 (5th Cir. 1982)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Johns-Manville Corporation and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. the United States, Defendant-Appellee., 855 F.2d 1556 (Fed. Cir. 1988)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Paul Guidry, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John Durkin, Defendant-Appellee., 834 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1987)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Carmine Fiorentino v. the United States., 607 F.2d 963 (Fed. Cir. 1979)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Helen Mitchell Et Al. v. the United States., 591 F.2d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 1979)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - No. 97-5055., 146 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 1998)

See all citations to this document

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court MATSON NAV. CO. v. UNITED STATES, 284 U.S. 352 (1932)

[Page 284 U.S. 352, 360]

ing out of or incident to the exercise by or through the President of any of the powers or duties conferred or imposed upon the President.' It preserved to every suitor 'the same right to sue the United States as he would have had if the decision had been made by the President of the United States under the Acts hereby repealed.' Assuming, without deciding, that the present claim is one which the Board was authorized to settle, we think it clear that the act did not purport to enlarge existing remedies or establish a new procedure for the enforcement of maritime obligations which, like the present, are embraced within the Suits in Admiralty Act.

We have considered, but find it unnecessary to discuss, other less substantial grounds advanced for denying the applicability of the Suits in Admiralty Act. The judgment will be affirmed, but without prejudice to an application by the petitioner to the court below, if so advised, for leave to amend the petition.

Affirmed.

Sponsored Ads:

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

Constitutions
Forms and Contracts
Legal Books and Journals
Case Law
News and Business
Regulations
U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access

Home / United States /

Case Law

vlex /