Washington Iron Works v. The Orient

Citations

• 5 Alaska 438

Syllabus

<p>1. Maritime Liens <&wkey;27.—Admiralty.</p> <p>Libelant sold certain winches and other maritime stores to a general dealer and ship repairer on open account, who sold the same in due course of his business and put them on the vessels libeled, where they were paid for by the owners. The libel-ant filed a lien on the vessels for the value of the winches. Held, the libelant having sold the winches to their customer, a general dealer, on open account, and the latter having furnished the same to the owners of the vessels libeled, and having been paid therefor, there was never any lien reserved to the libelant therefor. Libels dismissed.</p> <p>2. Maritime Liens <&wkey;65—Statutory Rule.</p> <p>Act Gong. June 23, 1910, c. 373, 36 Stat. 604 (U. S. Oomp. St. 1916, §§ 7783-7787), does away with the presumption heretofore obtaining that “repairs, supplies, or other necessaries” furnished to a vessel in its home port were not furnished on the credit or the vessel, and in substance establishes the presumption that they were furnished on the credit of the vessel; but that statutory presumption does not bar the owner of the libeled vessel from proving affirmatively that the articles were sold to some third person and were not furnished either on his credit or the credit of the vessel.</p> <p><@3^See same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes</p>