Minerais U.S. Inc., Exalmet Division v. M/V MOSLAVINA, Her Engines, Boilers, Turner Marine Bulk, Inc., 94-30258
| Decision Date | 06 March 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-30258,94-30258 |
| Citation | 46 F.3d 501 |
| Parties | MINERAIS U.S. INC., EXALMET DIVISION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M/V MOSLAVINA, her engines, boilers, etc., et al., Defendants, Turner Marine Bulk, Inc., Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
A. Carter Mills, IV, John C. Persons, Montgomery, Barnett, Brown, Read, Hammond & Mintz, New Orleans, LA, for appellant.
Richard B. Foster, Lemle & Kelleher, New Orleans, LA, for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Before REAVLEY, DUHE and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
Defendant Turner Marine Bulk, a New Orleans stevedore, negligently commingled two lots of ferrochrome that Plaintiff Minerais U.S. Inc. was importing for resale in the United States. Minerais had purchased 700 metric tons (MT) high grade ferrochrome and 1000 MT low grade ferrochrome; 250 MT high grade ferrochrome escaped damage, and the remaining 450 MT high grade and the 1000 MT low grade ferrochrome were commingled. None of the combined material fell within the higher grade, and Plaintiff was forced to downgrade 450 MT high grade material to low grade for purposes of resale. This appeal concerns only the issue of damages.
The district court awarded damages based on wholesale values of the material (i.e., wholesale value of 450 MT high grade ferrochrome minus wholesale value of 450 MT low grade ferrochrome), finding that Plaintiff failed to establish the fair market value as the appropriate measure of damages. Holding that Plaintiff adequately established fair market values, we reverse and remand for application of the market-value rule using retail values as specified herein.
The market-value rule requires that damages be calculated using market values at the time the cargo is discharged. Such a damage award places the injured cargo owner in the same position it was in before the damage. The market-value rule makes the cargo claimant whole by awarding him the difference between the fair market value of the undamaged cargo and the fair market value of the cargo as damaged on the date of discharge at the port of destination. Cook Indus., Inc. v. Barge UM-308, 622 F.2d 851, 854 (5th Cir.1980).
Nothing in Illinois Central Railroad v. Crail compels use of the wholesale price rather than retail. See Illinois Cent. R.R. v. Crail, 281 U.S. 57, 64-65, 50 S.Ct. 180, 181, 74 L.Ed. 699 (1930) () (awarding wholesale value of lost shipment). Illinois Central was a shortage-in-delivery case, not a damaged-goods case; where cargo is downgraded but not completely destroyed, this Court has held the market-value rule to be both a convenient and accurate means of measuring damages. Cook Indus., 622 F.2d at 855-56. We hold the rule provides an accurate measure of damages in this case as well.
In June 1990, when the shipment was discharged in New Orleans, the average market price of high grade ferrochrome was $1.15 per pound of contained chromium, according to Metals Week (a weekly publication), which was found by the district court to be the most reliable evidence of the market price. Published market quotations of bulk commodities provide simple proof of market value and damages so as to support application of the market-value rule. See 2 Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Admiralty and Maritime Law Sec. 10-36 (2d ed. 1994); see also Amstar Corp. v. M/V ALEXANDROS T., 472 F.Supp. 1289, 1294 (D.Md.1979), aff'd, 664 F.2d 904 (4th Cir.1981). Further, Minerais' retail sales price in August 1990 corroborated Metals Week by establishing $1.15 per pound of chromium as the retail price. The market value of high grade ferrochrome at the time of the arrival of the shipment was thus adequately established at $1.15 per pound of chromium.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Celta Agen. v. Denizcilksanayi Ve Ticaaret
...727 (Thompson West 4th ed.2001). See also, BP N. Am. Petroleum v. SOLAR ST, 250 F.3d 307, 312 (5th Cir.2001); Minerais U.S. Inc. v. M/V Moslavina, 46 F.3d 501, 502 (5th Cir.1995); Fortis Corp. Ins., S.A. v. M/V CIELO DEL CANADA, 320 F.Supp.2d 95, 106 (S.D.N.Y.2004); Ferro Union, Inc. v. M/V......
-
FIRST COMMONWEALTH v. HIBERNIA BANK NEW ORLEANS, Civ. A. No. 91-2743.
...a practical matter. Minerais U.S. Inc. v. M/V Moslavina, 849 F.Supp. 467, 479 (E.D.La.1994) (Sear, C.J.), rev'd on other grounds, 46 F.3d 501 (5th Cir.1995), citing Schwarz v. Folloder, 767 F.2d 125, 130 (5th Cir.1985). An award of costs is within the discretion of the trial court. Kodak, 7......
- Williams v. Dir., Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
-
Maass Flanges Corp. v. Totran Transp. Servs. Inc.
...Contempo Metal Furniture Co. of Calif. v. E. Tex. Motor Freight Lines, 661 F.2d 761, 764 (9th Cir. 1981); Mineral U.S. Inc. Exam-Met Div. v. M/V/Moslavina, 46 F.3d 501 (5th Cir. 1995); see also Fredette v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 66 F.3d 369, 372 (1st Cir. 1995) (stating that actual loss is......