Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SECOND CIRCUIT.


decided.: April 30, 1957.

FRANCISCO ROMERO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL OPERATING CO., COMPANIA TRASATLANTICA, ALSO KNOWN AS SPANISH LINE, GARCIA & DIAZ, INC., AND QUIN LUMBER CO., INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

Before HINCKS, LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam.

We affirm on Judge Sugarman's workmanlike opinion below which contains a full statement of the facts.

We do not, however, overlook the appellant's invocation of Article VI*fn1 of the treaty of 1902 between the United States and Spain, 33 Stat. 2105, in support of his contention, made apparently for the first time on the appeal, that the court below had jurisdiction under the Jones Act. 46 U.S.C.A. ยง 688. We find nothing in the text of that Article which confers upon the appellant, a Spanish subject, the substantive rights created by the Jones Act. The appellant also argues that the abrogation of Article XXIII*fn2 of that treaty somehow demonstrates the presence of jurisdiction below. But as to this, appellant's counsel, with commendable candor, subsequent to argument provided us with a letter from a legal adviser in the State Department which states that Article XXIII of the 1902 treaty has been abrogated only in so far as its provisions are in conflict with the Seaman's Act of March 4, 1915, 38 Stat. 1164.*fn3 Neither in Article XXIII nor in its abrogation do we find support for the appellant's position on the jurisdictional questions involved.

Affirmed.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.