Bellocchio v. ITALIA FLOTTE RIUNITE COSULICH LINE, ETC., 414.
| Decision Date | 06 July 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 414.,414. |
| Parties | BELLOCCHIO et al. v. ITALIA FLOTTE RIUNITE COSULICH LINE LLOYD SABAUDO NAVIGAZIONE GENERALE. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Joseph F. Ruggieri, of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Anthony J. Travia, of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for appellants.
Loomis, Williams & Donahue, of New York City (Homer L. Loomis and Thomas F. Peterson, Jr., both of New York City, of counsel), for appellees.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
The plaintiff was a passenger upon the defendant's steamer, and while disembarking at Naples got her foot caught under a plank and was injured. Her account of the occurrence is very vague and gives some plausibility to the defendant's argument that it leaves too much to conjecture to support a verdict. Nevertheless we think there was enough to show how she was hurt, and that it might have been due to some lapse in that high degree of care which is demanded of common carriers towards their passengers. It was permissible for a jury to find the following facts; we do not of course suggest that they must have done so. A gangplank ran from the rail to the wharf, the ship's end of which was raised some inches above the flush of the deck. To avoid a step up, a second plank was provided running inboard from the end of the gangplank, and forming an incline or ramp for a little distance. The plaintiff was about to step upon one end of this second plank when the passenger ahead of her stepped on the other end in such a way that the end near her rose and fell upon her foot. If something of the kind happened, a jury might find that it was not beyond what the ship should have provided against; the passengers were using the planks as they were expected to use them, and they went awry. That put the defendant to its proof.
The case was not dismissed on this issue, but because of a provision on the back of the ticket requiring an injured passenger to give written notice of any claim for injuries within thirty days after the ship's arrival. No such notice was given. Such limitations are lawful and when the time given is, as here, thirty days, they would be reasonable, except for the practice of taking up the ticket early in the trip and leaving the passenger in ignorance of the limitation at the only time when it becomes important. On its face such a practice appears so unfair as to make doubtful the validity of the limitation itself; but since there may be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McQuillan v. " ITALIA" SOCIETA PER AZIONE DI NAVIGAZIONE
...German Lloyd, 69 F.2d 88 (2d Cir. 1934); Maibrunn v. Hamburg-American S.S. Co., 77 F.2d 304 (2d Cir. 1935); Bellocchio v. Italia Flotte Riunite, 84 F.2d 975 (2d Cir. 1936); The Kungsholm, 86 F.2d 703 (2d Cir. 1936); Silvestri, supra; Owens v. Italia Societa Per Azione Navigazione Genova, 70......
-
DeNicola v. Cunard Line Ltd.
...S.S. Co., 467 F.2d 464, 466 (5th Cir. 1972) (passenger's signature at end of ticket). 5 Accord, e. g., Bellochio v. Italia Flotte Riunite Cosulich Line, 84 F.2d 975, 976 (2d Cir. 1936); Maibrunn v. Hamburg-American S.S. Co., 77 F.2d 304, 305-06 (2d Cir. 1935); Baer v. North German Lloyd, 69......
-
Silvestri v. Italia Societa Per Azioni Di Navigazione
...way authenticates by its own signature; notices and legends alongside are not part of it." A year later he found Bellocchio v. Italia Flotte Riunite, 84 F.2d 975 (2 Cir. 1936), where there was no notice at all on the face, to be an even stronger case in favor of the passenger. However, the ......
-
Mayer v. Zim Israel Navigation Co., 121
...88; The Leviathan, 2 Cir., 1934, 72 F.2d 286; Maibrunn v. Hamburg-American S.S. Co., 2 Cir., 1935, 77 F.2d 304; Bellocchio v. Italia Flotte Riunite, 2 Cir., 1936, 84 F.2d 975; The Kungsholm, 2 Cir., 1936, 86 F.2d 703; Baron v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 2 Cir., 1939, 108 F.2d 21; F......
-
Chapter § 3.02 CRUISE SHIPS
...Per Azioni Di Navigazione, 388 F.2d 11 (2d Cir. 1968); The Kungsholm, 96 F.2d 703 (2d Cir. 1936); Bellocchio v. Italia Flotte Riunite, 84 F.2d 975 (2d Cir. 1936); Maiburn v. Hamburg-American S.S. Co., 77 F.2d 304 (2d Cir. 1935); Baer v. North German Lloyd, 69 F.2d 88 (2d Cir. 1934); Smith v......