# Reply Brief for the Petitioners — Comley v. United States

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385602_0817%3A4

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Reply Brief for the Petitioners
- **Published:** January 1, 1965
- **Citation:** 379 U.S. 991

## Text

LP ae te

Se Bae.

| LisiiaRY, ._ | ; |
SUPREME COURT, Us Se . FILED.

oh F. DAVIS, 5 CLERK

Peni Court of the Buited Staten

October = 1965"

No. 399

SARAH SMITH, as Administratrix of the Estate of
, JOHN C. SMITH, Deceased, and GEORGE THOMAS

HOLLEY,
Petitioners, .

i Vv.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and MARIN E TRANS-
PORT LINES INC., as Owners of the USNS POTOMAC, -
Respondents.

_ On Perrrion ror a Writ or CertioraRi To THE UNITED
States Court or APPEALS FOR THE Fourtrs Circuit .

“REPLY BRIEF FOR THE PETITIONERS

Marvin Scuwarrz,
233 Broadway,
New York, New York,

Carvin W. Brert,
500 Helena Building,
Norfolk, Virginia,

Attorneys for Petitioners.

Donatp E. Kier, -

C. ArtTuour Rotter, JR.,
ied Cownect.

,
Sot Ct Atheletes Rel ele ea

INDEX
| ‘ PAGE
Argument S Lek y ee ahah eee ee ate aaa ae cia
SD nas cu dceabs sack caanuneéssia¥eues cas 5

Table of Authorities
CasEs: — es

Blanchard v. United States, 347 F. 2d 268 (Ct. Cl.

Waianae HiavieG eae 3

Jansen v. United States, 344 F. 2d 363 (Ct. Cl.

ROE. eskaucie eree Dhaene oe

Johnson v. Emergency Fleet Corp., 280 U.S. 320 - |.

OM. cx cucvedsenieces PONE AActiee 9 2
: ‘ Maryland, for the use of Levin v. United . States,
Re Cs vedo cxceucsiuvucrice. 2, 3.
Statutes & Reouarions: | .

50. GO oii ick BES eo
* QAP RAMA etd Hing OE
80.0, F.B.11402 ............ eaientes “ates a Bae

me

-Suproms Court of ie Yuited States
October Term, 1965
_No.: 399

ray
Vv

. Saran SMITH, as Administratriz of the Estate of Joun e :
; Smiru, Deceased, and Grorce Tuomas Houtzy,
} Petitioners, —

v. . Paes

- UNITED. STATES or AMERICA and MarRINE TRANSPORT LINEs
Inc., as Owners of the USNS Poromac, :
Respondents.

On PeErrrion For A WRIT oF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
Srates Court OF APpP2ALS FOR THE Fourts Circurr

— ,
Vv

REPLY BRIEF FOR THE PETITIONERS

_ Argument :
Contrary to the assertion on page 7 of the saiapiidiaicha’
brief in opposition, the petitioners do: not contend that
Marine Transport Lines, Inc. was an ‘‘operating agent’’
_ or an agent of any other kind. In their brief the attorneys
for the United States of America characterized Marine |
Transport Lines as an ‘‘operating agent’’ no less than eight —
times. This characterization, which is solely that of, the
_ attorneys for the ‘United States, seems to have been in use
‘by the. Department of Justice since at least 1948, the year of
the earliest of the Congressional Reports cited on page 8 of
respondents’ brief. Notwithstanding the age of the phrase,
it does not in any way appear in the contract between
. by 3

oo,

¢

Fér the reasons set forth aie and in the Petition
heretofore filed, the Petition for Certiorari should be
granted.

Respectfully submitted, -

‘Marvin Scuwakrz,
233 Broadway,
New York, New York, |

Canvin W. Brerr,
500 Helena Building,
‘Norfolk, Virginia,

Attorneys for Petitioners.

Donaxp E. Kuz1n,
C. ArrHur Rutter, Jz.,
Of Counsel.

etree na ciae ee apart ND Fens Cnet RES NEA)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385602_0817%3A4. Public record. Not legal advice.