Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

The Steamboat New York, Her Tackle, Apparel, &C., Thomas C. Durant, Charles W. Durant, And Septimus Lathrop, Claimants And Appellants, v. Isaac P. Rea, Owner Of The Brig Sarah Johanna

1855 • 59 U.S. 223 • Taney Court
This Supreme Court case involved a dispute between the claimants and appellants, Thomas C. Durant, Charles W. Durant and Septimus Lathrop (the Durants), who owned the steamboat New York, her tackle, apparel etc., and Isaac P. Rea who was the owner of the brig Sarah Johanna. The Durants had filed an appeal in response to a decision by a district court that found them liable for damages caused when their steamboat collided with Rea's brig while they were both sailing on Lake Ontario in 1853. The...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taney Court
Term: 1855
59 U.S. 223
15 L. Ed. 359
1855 U.S. LEXIS 689

The Steamboat New York, Her Tackle, Apparel, &C., Thomas C. Durant, Charles W. Durant, And Septimus Lathrop, Claimants And Appellants, v. Isaac P. Rea, Owner Of The Brig Sarah Johanna

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

This Supreme Court case involved a dispute between the claimants and appellants, Thomas C. Durant, Charles W. Durant and Septimus Lathrop (the Durants), who owned the steamboat New York, her tackle, apparel etc., and Isaac P. Rea who was the owner of the brig Sarah Johanna. The Durants had filed an appeal in response to a decision by a district court that found them liable for damages caused when their steamboat collided with Rea's brig while they were both sailing on Lake Ontario in 1853. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against the Durants as it determined that they had been negligent in failing to take proper precautions before entering into open water which resulted in their vessel colliding with Rea's ship causing damage to his property; thus making them responsible for paying restitution for those damages incurred by him due to this incident.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion of this case, Justice McLean argued that the claimants and appellants should have been awarded damages for their losses. He believed that under maritime law, they were entitled to compensation for any damage caused by a vessel in collision with another ship. The majority opinion had found that since there was no evidence of negligence on either side, neither party could be held liable for damages. However, Justice McLean disagreed and stated that even if both vessels acted properly during the incident, one must still bear responsibility when an accident occurs at sea. Therefore he concluded that it was unjust to deny the claimants' claim without awarding them some form of reparation or indemnity as provided by maritime law.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms