Tennessee Valley Sand & Gravel Co. v. M/V Delta, 604 F.2d 13 (5th Cir. 1979). · Go Syfert
Search
Tennessee Valley Sand & Gravel Co. v. M/V Delta, 604 F.2d 13 (5th Cir. 1979). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
Quick Summary
21 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Cont'l Oil Co. v. Bonanza Corp., 677 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1982)
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981 2003 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 13 cited at this page1 citing case
  • Claire Denicola v. Cunard Line Ltd., 642 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1981).published
    See, e. g., Carpenter v. Klosters Rederi A/S, 604 F.2d at 13; McQuillan v. “Italia” Societa Per Azione Di Navigazione, 386 F.Supp. at 466 , aff’d, 516 F.2d 896 (2d Cir. 1975).
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TENNESSEE VALLEY SAND & GRAVEL CO., Cross-Appellee
v.
M/V DELTA, her engines, tackle, apparel, etc., in rem and Hobart-Worley Towing Company, Inc., in personam
No. 77-2202.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Oct 5, 1979.
Published opinion
604 F.2d 13
1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 11365
E. Spivey Gault, Frank S. Thackston, Jr., Greenville, Miss., for plaintiff-appellant cross-appellee., Joel J. Henderson, Greenville, Miss., for defendants-appellees cross-appellants.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1) · S.D. Florida (1) · W.D. Texas (1)
PER CURIAM:

IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing filed in the above entitled and numbered cause be and the same is hereby denied insofar as it seeks reconsideration of the result reached.

However, in reversing the trial court’s denial of damages for the expenses incurred in salvaging the barge, it was not the intention of the majority to allow the recovery of the gross amount of expenses; credit should be given for the net proceeds received from sale of the salvaged barge. In order to avoid any misapprehension, the last sentence of the opinion is revised to read as follows:

The trial court’s denial of damages for the expenses incurred in salvaging the barge is reversed. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. In computing the amount of damages due the appellant, the sum received for sale of the barge is to be deducted and the appellant is to be awarded only the net costs incurred.

While Judge Godbold is of the opinion that this clarification is proper, he adheres to his original dissenting opinion, and continues to hold the view that the district court should be affirmed.