United States v. Ladd, 6355.

• Decision Date: 05 February 1952
• Docket Number: No. 6355.,6355.
• Citation: 193 F.2d 929
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. LADD. THE MOHICAN. THE ELOISE.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

193 F.2d 929 (1952)

UNITED STATES v. LADD THE MOHICAN THE ELOISE.

No. 6355.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued January 7, 1952.

Decided February 5, 1952.

William T. Foley, Jr., Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., (Holmes Baldridge, Asst. Atty. Gen., A. Carter Whitehead, U. S. Atty., Richmond, Va., William B. Eley, Asst. U. S. Atty., Norfolk, Va., and J. Frank Staley, Special Asst. to the Atty. Gen., on brief), for appellant.

Hugh S. Meredith, Norfolk, Va (Vandeventer, Black & Meredith, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellee.

Before PARKER, SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.

DOBIE, Circuit Judge.

This libel in admiralty was instituted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia under the Public Vessels Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 781 et seq., by one Ladd (hereinafter called libellant) to recover from the United States (hereinafter called appellant) damages sustained by his sloop Eloise, due to the alleged negligent manoeuvering of the coast guard cutter Mohican.

On Sunday, July 23, 1950, the sloop Eloise, owned by the libellant, was sailing on a shakedown cruise in Norfolk Harbor. The Eloise is a large Marconi rigged sloop, 54 feet in length, with a beam of 18.8 feet, 20 net tons in weight and carrying a mast 70 feet in height and approximately 14 inches in diameter at the point where it passed through the deck of the vessel. She was built in 1911. The sail area of the vessel, including a mainsail and jib, was approximately 2,300 square feet. The Eloise did not have an auxiliary motor.

Libellant had purchased the Eloise in October, 1949, for use as a pleasure craft but prior to that time the sloop had been engaged for many years in dredging oysters in North Carolina waters.

Around 12:30 p. m., while proceeding down the Elizabeth River, the Eloise was becalmed in the lee of the Norfolk and Western Railroad Piers. In this position, the sloop was pointing downstream on the starboard side of the channel at a 45° angle to the line of the channel.

While the sloop was thus becalmed, libellants and others aboard her observed the Mohican rounding Lambert's Point heading upstream. Fearing that the wake from the Mohican might swamp the Eloise, they attempted to warn the cutter of the plight of the sloop by waving from the bowsprit, ringing a bell and blowing upon a fog horn. Evidently these warnings passed unobserved or unheeded, for the Mohican neither slackened her speed nor altered her course.

The swells created by the Mohican caught the becalmed Eloise broadside, and as a result of the impact of the swells, the mast of the Eloise snapped with resulting damage to her sails and the deck railing.

At the trial, there was a great deal of dispute as to the speed of the Mohican and her distance from the Eloise at the time she passed. Witnesses from the Mohican testified she was proceeding at a speed of 8.5 knots or 165 r. p. m., and that the distance between the vessels when the Mohican passed was 175 yards. On the other hand, witnesses from the Eloise maintained that the speed of the Mohican was 12 knots or 235 r. p. m., and the distance between the sloop and the cutter was only 50 to 55 yards. There is also a great deal of dispute as to the condition of the mast on the Eloise.

Upon these facts, the District Court determined that the Eloise was seaworthy and that the reason her mast snapped was the excessive speed of the Mohican in view of the "obvious plight" of the sloop. From this decision, awarding damages to libellant in the sum of $2,000, appellant has appealed to us.

Appellant first contends that the District Court erred by its failure to make specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law as required under Rule 46½ of the Admiralty Rules of the Supreme Court...