*3
element,
involve a
been said to
time
has
FRANK,
SWAN,
Before
CHASE and
of a “fourth dimension—
consideration
Judges.
Circuit
ap-
namely
it also
that of time.”
2Since
attempt
parently
an
to coordinate
involves
-
FRANK,
Judge.
Circuit
two different national
the currencies of
occurred in British ter-
The collision
legal phi-
systems, a mathematical-minded
between British and Ameri-
ritorial waters
lospher might suggest
application of the
The British
is
can vessels.
vessel
owned
general theory
relativity,8
seeks
corporation which has
libellant, a British
physi-
formulate “laws” for all coordinate
London,
place of business
office and
systems
uniformity.3
cal
thus to attain
stipulated
parties have
England. The
Happily,
spared
this court is
such Ein-
claimant-appellee, owner of the Ameri-
effort,4
Supreme
for the
steinian
Court
of the
vessel, is liable for
can
has
out
solution
worked
which we must
vessel.
owner
accept.
item con-
around one
dispute centers
The
repairs,
money
It
well settled that
is
sisting of the amount
by judgment by an American
court must be
ship,
country
made in this
to libellant’s
currency.5
question
in issue
there
The other items
Shipyards.
Todd
1. Lord
Volturno,
Liberty
E.D.Pa.,
Wrenbury
Nat.
[1921]
Bank of N. Y. v.
F.
2 A.C.
S.
252.
S. Celia
Burr,
563.
S. S.
D.C.
Cf.
4. Cf.
Uniform Commercial
131.
Contemp.
Rheinstein,
Problems
Conflict of Laws In the
(1951) 114, 129,
Code,
16 Law
ISO-
g.,
anti-relativity,
See e.
Liebeskind v. Mexican
really
5.
L.
P.
uni-
2.
It
Cir.,
971;
116 F.2d
theory.
Guinness v.
formity,
Miller, D.C.S.D.N.Y.,
291 F.
770-
Infeld, The Evolution
Einstein
See
771;
Transport
Frontera
Co. v. Abaun
(1938)
Physics
za, Cir.,
Nussbaum, Money
271 F.
(1950)
in the Law
364-365. Cf. 31 U.S.
applicable
this,
rules are
as to
The same
like
arises,
in a case
fore
Con
obligations.
Restatement
tort
proper date for
L.
Harvard
controlling
Laws,
flict of
own.
currency into our
“Upon
619',
Hicks Rev.
625 it
said:
the federal courts
authorities
right arises
dam
70 commission of a tort a
269 U.S.
Guiness,
money
expressed
ages,
Fialiale
in units
Bank
Die Deutsche
L.Ed.
517,6 47
occurred.10
country
in which
the tort
Humphrey, 272 U.S.
Nurnberg v.
They
expressed in
primarily
have been
damages,
These
L.Ed. 383.
5. Ct.
country,
money
as follows.7
Williston
summarized
as of
money
that the
of the forum
Supreme
“has held
translated
Court
*4
in a
obliga
merged
right
date when
for breach
the
the
value of
a
currency
Conversely,
the
where
in
performable
foreign
judgment.11
forum
tion
in
time
the
forum,
tort
is taken at
occurs in
dam
but
where
* *
breach,
*;
obliga
ages
but where the
must
in
for
be reckoned
terms
country
performable
in
foreign
tion is
in a
eign money,
reparation
right
is ex
country,
judgment
money
of that
pressed
forum at
money
in
day
applicable,
rule has been
held
arises, and
the date the cause of action
ground
obligation
that ‘an
in terms of
exchange existing
on
hence
rate of
currency
country
of that
takes the risk
prevail.”
such date
With
**
*
If the debt
fluctuation
agree.
statement we
due here
the value of dollars
been
had
dropped
brought,
was
before suit
tort,
foreign
a
a
Here we have
on
plaintiff
more dollars
could recover no
” 8
collision in British
territorial waters.12
has held
that account.’
This court
relating
Accordingly,
cases
to collisions
applies to
judgment-day
the so-called
rule
high
in our waters13
on
seas14 are
or
unliquidated damages
the cause of
where
foreign origin.9
inapposite.
English
action was of
The
courts
seem
371;
applying
liberty
Bank of
National
C.A.
9. For cases in this Circuit
§
Burr, D.C.,
rule,
judgment-day
F.
N.
v.
270
Det Forenede
Y.
see
Dampskibs Selskab v. Ins. Co. of North
253.
judg-
659;
America, Cir.,
658,
2
continental countries
F.2d
Thorn-
In some
31
City
York,
in
for
is often
ton v. National
Bank of New
ment
374ff;
currency.
Nussbaum,
130;
Cir.,
127,
See
loe. cit.
2
45 F.2d
v.
Tillman
Bank, Cir.,
1023,
Fraenkel, Foreign Moneys
2
in Domestic
Asiatic
51 F.2d
Russo
1025,
1368;
Arrow,
Courts,
(1935)
The
80 A.L.R.
West
35 CoLL.Bev.
360 and 386-
838;
387;
(Rev.ed.)
Cir.,
853,
Williston,
2
F.2d
Booth &
§
Contracts
80
cf.
Merchant
Co. v. Canadian Government
Marine, Limited,
1410A.
240,
part probably
Cir.,
2
63 F.2d
241.
in
due
The difference is
systems,
that,
in
to the fact
civil law
Mandu,
Cir.,
459,
2
F.2d
10. See The
102
remedy.
specific
See
relief is the usual
463;
Laws,
of Conflict of
Restatement
Huston, The Enforcement of Decrees in
409,
Sections
424.
6-7, 39-53; Nussbaum,
Equity (1915)
Macdonough-Werfa,
11.
152ff;
Pekclis, Legal
1934 A. M. C.
cf.
Tech-
loe. cit.
niques
Dampskibs
Det
Ideologies,
cf.
Ferenede
Sel
Mich.
Political
41
America,
665, 669f£.,
skab v. Insurance Co. of North
the ineffi-
L.Rev.
Cir.,
Dec. 250 204 1950 121
.Mar. . 113 226 262 204 . 114 . 123 236 294 208 June Sept. 122 114 . 250 377 213 Dec. . 116 125 269 462 219
United States Living Wholesale Cost Prices Raw All Finished Items Food General Materials Goods 1949
Sept. 165 . 178 191 172 194 . 188 Dec. 163 187 175 170 1950 . 163 192 186 177 171
Mar. . 166 194 182 198 176 June Sept. . 469 214 . 174 Dec. Appendix England,26 no redress in and therefore should have none here. part stipulation as fol- reads in repair If bill in libellant had on having lows : “Libel been filed herein dollars, obligated so, or were to do it still by Shaw, Savill, Albion might perhaps arguable that be Co., Ltd., the amount of recover be to be that entitled reimbursed damages colli- sustained reason of a precise e., $118,- dollars, i. amount of sion which between its steam- occurred 840.03; consider that but need not we ship Tamaroa vessel Fredericks- tank problem, is not us here. since it before burg at anchor lay while the Tamaroa payment of the Because of libellant’s Bangor Ire- Anchorage, Lough, Belfast pounds, payment to Todd dol- land, January on the morning drops equation, so to lars out of the having cross-libel on been filed herein speak. Inc., Tankers, October by Paco Fredericksburg, owner of tank The United a 'brief filed as vessel
amicus, suggests recover the said the result here is sustained vessel, peculiarly as a result- colli- fair because the devaluation of the aforesaid sion; pound parties part “managed respective and the cur hereto having rency” plan, agreed April 6, so that the to a set- decreased to, tlement of no the above-entitled rate bore relation suits Inc., Tankers, basis of Paco affect, purchasing bearing the not the domestic did damage power although sustained it and Fred- pound.27 But ericksburg withdrawing any some claim conceivably fact relevant against therefor steamship Tamaroa other kinds of cases where conversion claimant, her pay- and in addition foreign currency necessary, thereto ing provable damages sus- deciding it in this case. considered 75% tained by steamship Tamaroa in- argues parties Libellant in- both terest computed thereon to be at the rate conversion into American tended cur- per annum year from one after the rency existing to be at the expendi- Tamaroa’s date various at the date of the to Todd be- *7 paid; tures losses until Paco and and intention, cause, that not been the Inc., 7, having Tankers, 1949, on March willing been not have the claimant would partial payment made a sum of the 7, account, on March payment on to make $100,000 damages on account of the sus- $100,000. The large a sum as so Tamaroa, by tained in order to avoid the persuasive, argument, at best too the further of interest on said accrual n omits amount important an fact: pending agreement amount final decree, claim- before crediting in the fixed damage n ant with the the items total of individual $100,000 payment on ac- Tamaroa; sustained the re- and the amount, e., of that i. count, in excess was spective parties having hereto thereafter principal interest 4101,750.02 and for agreement on the reached an nature and payment. of that the date damages amounts of the sustained by properly for therefore decree was Shaw, libellant, Savill, Ltd., Co., Albion & plus e., $1,750.02, interest difference, i. forth, as set hereinafter $1,- or total March from stipulated (cid:127)911.24. agreed hereby “It is and proctors respective and between Affirmed. always cases, pound Perhaps “a is domestic all civilized countries always pound,” “commodity” (or “price-index” dollar,” “a or dollar or is have regardless actually currency. power”) “purchasing Cf. decreased value. Nussbaum, Nussbaum, cit., Eng loc. cit. As 299ff. But the loc. Nussbaum, exceptions, see loc. 182- courts, ours, cit. exceptions, and with few lish 48 Col.L.Rev. adopted the so-called “nominalistic 27. See notes 23 supra. according purely theory,” which, and damages ican that such rate of libel- was and parties hereto that $2.80 Co., Ltd., applicable the conversion lant, Shaw, Savill, Albion from in its amounts of items 17 and 20 reason of matters set forth currency. date of British to American together Sterling libel herein with expenditure item applicable each loss stipulated agreed “It is further and are as follows:” Ltd., Shaw, Savill, Co., Albion & reading: items, from Paco last entitled to recover Here follow 36 Tankers, Inc., steamship Fred- claimant of Shipyards Corpo- “36. Todd value, ericksburg, stipulators its and/or ration, repairs at New damages as above amount 75% set York forth, thereon at the interest rate- $118,840.03” July 1945 .......... year per one annum calculated from 6% fol- stipulation continues as then after the each date set forth under lows: individual items until March agreed stipulated and “It is further upon payment partial date of the- which a repairs Tamaroa that the costs of $100,000 Tank- sum of made Paco $118,- sum of effected at ers, Inc., per an- and with interest at 6% under Item 840.03 as set forth above upon num balance between amount said paid by the first instance of libellant’s sum Shipping War Administra- United States until ; debited tion this amount was date of thereof. against Trans- British of War Ministry libellant, Shaw, “It is understood that port Administra- Shipping the War Savill, Ltd., Co., Albion & contends that July tion and thereafter damages expressed amount of its Transport was Ministry of War British Sterling British as above forth, except- set Shaw, amount Sa- reimbursed in such ing Items 16,17 and should be converted’ Ltd., herein, vill, Albion & into American Tamaroa. owner of the $4.025; and that the amount stipulated agreed is further “It constituting repairs Item 36 the cost of ef- damage items of all the times when the Shipyard fected at New York by Todd Cor- expressed Sterling were in British above poration should be allowed and confirmed (excepting items incurred or in the sum of without con- repair 20); at all times when version said sum into Sterling British paid by (Item 36) was reconversion into American currency; Administration, when the amount thereof Inc., Tankers, that Paco contends that the Ministry against was debited the British damage amount of the items of as above *8 Transport, of when the War and British expressed set forth Sterling (ex- British Ministry Transport of was War reim- cept 20) items 17 and should be con- by amount of such bursed the debit currency verted into American at the ex- Co., Shaw, Savill, Ltd., Albion libel- & change rate of and that the amount $2.80 herein; at times when lant the the terms of Item in the sum of agreed up- the suit were of settlement of currency be converted from American to respective parties the hereto on on between British at the Sterling exchange of rate payment and when the April $4,025, rate being exchange applica- the account was made Paco on ble at the time said amount was debited Inc., Tankers, on the rate against Ministry the British of War Trans- the exchange for conversion of British port by the United States War Sterling into was $4.- Administration the time and said debit was Ministry the to British of War Trans- herein, stipulated port agreed making the that sum of “It is further £29,525.9.6, that subsequent September 19, this amount to times should be the at all into exchange applicable reconverted American currency at the rate the- exchange the rate $2.80, applica- rate of Sterling of British to Amer- agreed mak- lower are that the upon stipulation, court decisions ble the date this amount to reference ing $82,671.33, said “the moment when the suit sum of thereby brought” was carry July inadvertence interest from was an judg to claimant what was moment of giving effect to the allowance meant was the judgment- of one from the date of year’s interest ment. This is the source of applied item libellant as owner day by my of said rule brothers. theory it, is rule, of the Tamaroa. as I understand that our an amount judgment should be for agreed “It that understood and further equal greater just neither nor less but applicable rate of ex- the issue as to the which be rendered under change left to the Court for determina- law, law. Under Savill, libellant, Shaw, Albion tion and that seas, high case of a collision on the it is Ltd., enter a final thereafter held that cur stated such determi- decree herein on the basis of rency (Italian lire) should be converted prejudice right of ei- nation without sterling exchange into at the rate exist appeal party ther therefrom. loss, ing at the date of the i. e. the date of York, Y., May 12, N. “Dated: Volturno, 1921, the tort. Celia A.C. 1950.” British Had that collision occurred in high territorial waters rather than dissenting. SWAN, Judge, Circuit as to seas, I cannot conceive that rule we are bound I am convinced converting foreign the date for accept judg- controlling authority to sterling into would have been different. tort, date, than the date of ment rather bar, war, the re In case at due to exchange to be the rate of determine pairs be made in the United States. had to dollars; pounds into applied converting dollars, paid in bill was which the Todd’s agree my brothers’ view that I with nor do Transport con Ministry British yields just result judgment-day rule $4.025, pounds at rate verted in this case. at the date of the tort as well as rate Nurnberg Bank Fialiale Die Deutsche conversion, the date were Humphrey, 517, 47 272 U.S. S.Ct. from the then collected libellant. rate think my brothers L.Ed. pay at which the dollars to dam action controlling, was an to recover purchased, bill were was one of Todd’s ages breach of a contract German damages. of the libellant’s the elements pay marks Germany bank to demand. opinion the same should be my rate held courts debt should lower pounds paid by the libellant used when be translated at the rate of into dollars converted back into dollars exchange existing when the demand authority has been decree. No court’s Writing for the court Mr. made. Justice support one converting at cited to liability that the was to Holmes said reconverting at change another. If a open “and to satisfaction marks must result in marks, payment of that number parties, a windfall for one it seems time, might have ac whatever interest injured party to me fairer to let the benefit might have crued, the mark much however than the An rather tort-feasor. additional *9 compared with other in value .fallen why seems this fair in the reason case at opinion “Here His concluded: things.” bar still $4.025 lending Courts to enforce an our parties agreed effect when the to settle the put it, (as we obligation partial payment and when the suit arising from German law alone damages,) I obligation made. would reverse the greater to enforce no ought recomputation decree and direct moment by that law at the when exists than amount. brought.” Commentators and suit is