THOMPSON v. COASTAL OIL CO., 352 U.S. 862 (1956)
U.S. Supreme Court
THOMPSON v. COASTAL OIL CO. , 352 U.S. 862 (1956)
352 U.S. 862
William THOMPSON, petitioner,
v.
COASTAL OIL COMPANY.
No. 1.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 15, 1956
Messrs. Charles A. Ellis and Silas Blake Axtell, for petitioner.
Mr. Michael E. Hanrahan, for respondent.
On writ of
certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is reversed and the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey is reinstated.
Mr. Justice HARLAN concurs in the result, but would have preferred to remand the case to the Court of Appeals for determination as to whether the District Court properly found the vessel unseaworthy.
Mr. Justice REED, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, Mr. Justice BURTON, and Mr. Justice MINTON dissent.[ Thompson v. Coastal Oil Co. 352 U.S. 862 (1956) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
THOMPSON v. COASTAL OIL CO. , 352 U.S. 862 (1956)
William THOMPSON, petitioner,
v.
COASTAL OIL COMPANY.
No. 1.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 15, 1956
Messrs. Charles A. Ellis and Silas Blake Axtell, for petitioner.
Mr. Michael E. Hanrahan, for respondent.
On writ of
certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is reversed and the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey is reinstated.
Mr. Justice HARLAN concurs in the result, but would have preferred to remand the case to the Court of Appeals for determination as to whether the District Court properly found the vessel unseaworthy.
Mr. Justice REED, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, Mr. Justice BURTON, and Mr. Justice MINTON dissent.[ Thompson v. Coastal Oil Co. 352 U.S. 862 (1956) ]
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.
