History
  • No items yet
midpage
Perkins v. O'Mahoney
131 Mass. 546
Mass.
1881
Check Treatment
Gray, C. J.

By the law of the Commonwealth for three quarters of a century before the passage of the General Statutes, pilots entitled by statute to fees for services offered and refused might recover those fees by action against the master. St. 1783, *547c. 13. Rev. Sts. c. 32. Smith v. Swift, 8 Met. 329. Martin v. Hilton, 9 Met. 371. Winslow v. Prince, 6 Cush. 368. Hunt v. Carlisle, 1 Gray, 257. Chapter 52 of the General Statutes reenacts the principal provisions of the statutes thereby repealed; and the provision introduced in § 7 of that chapter, giving the pilot a lien on the vessel for his fees, does not, and has never been understood to, take away his right of action against the master therefor. Gen. Sts. c. 52, § 12. St. 1862, c. 176, schedule, els. 3, 4, 5, 10. Chandler v. Doody, 101 Mass. 267. Josselyn v. Gleason, 103 Mass. 237. Perkins v. Buckley, 120 Mass. 3. Wilson v. Gray, 127 Mass. 98. The America, 1 Lowell, 176.

The necessity imposed by statute to take a pilot for the security of life and property brings the case within the exception in the Lord’s day act. Gen. Sts. c. 84, §§ 1, 2.

Exceptions overruled.

Case Details

Case Name: Perkins v. O'Mahoney
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Nov 3, 1881
Citation: 131 Mass. 546
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.