From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wheeler v. West India S.S. Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 18, 1953
205 F.2d 354 (2d Cir. 1953)

Opinion

No. 250, Docket 22667.

Argued May 7, 1953.

Decided June 18, 1953.

George J. Engelman, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.

Haight, Deming, Gardner, Poor Havens, New York City, J. Ward O'Neill and John C. Mundt, Jr., New York City, of counsel, for defendant-appellee.

Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CHASE and CLARK, Circuit Judges.


The judgment vacating the verdict of the jury and directing a verdict in favor of the defendant is affirmed on the opinion of the District Court, 103 F. Supp. 631.

The plaintiff also appeals from an order of April 6, 1951, granting the defendant's motion to vacate the plaintiff's notice to amend his complaint to add a new claim for alleged failure promptly to repatriate the plaintiff and to provide him with proper medical and hospital care. A renewal at the trial of the plaintiff's motion to amend was also denied. The refusal to permit the addition of a third claim more than three years after the complaint was filed was clearly justified on the ground of laches and we do not think that there was any abuse of discretion. See 3 Moore, Federal Practice p. 835 (2d ed.).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Wheeler v. West India S.S. Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 18, 1953
205 F.2d 354 (2d Cir. 1953)
Case details for

Wheeler v. West India S.S. Co.

Case Details

Full title:WHEELER v. WEST INDIA S.S. CO

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Jun 18, 1953

Citations

205 F.2d 354 (2d Cir. 1953)

Citing Cases

Szopko v. Kinsman Marine Transit

The Second Circuit also has followed the general rule of Todahl. In Wheeler v West India S S Co, 205 F.2d…

Dixon v. Grace Lines, Inc.

Hence, a shipowner is not under a duty to provide a seaman with a safe means of going ashore and returning to…