Demetrius Maritime Co., Ltd. v. S/T" CONNECTICUT"
| Decision Date | 09 January 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 75 Civ. 3271 (JEL).,75 Civ. 3271 (JEL). |
| Citation | 463 F. Supp. 1108 |
| Parties | DEMETRIUS MARITIME COMPANY, LTD., and Saint Olga Maritime Co., Ltd., as Owner and Bareboat Charterer respectively of the motor vessel "ST. PANTELEIMON," Plaintiffs, v. S/T "CONNECTICUT," her engines, tackle, etc., and Connecticut Transport, Inc., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Dickerson, Reilly & Mullen, New York City by Robert W. Mullen, New York City, for plaintiffs.
Burlingham, Underwood & Lord, New York City by Joseph C. Smith, New York City, for defendants.
On June 15, 1975, defendant Connecticut Transport, Inc.'s ship the S/T Connecticut collided with the St. Panteleimon, then owned by co-plaintiff Demetrius Maritime Company, Ltd. and under bareboat charter to co-plaintiff St. Olga Maritime Co., Ltd., while the latter ship was moored at the Robinson Terminal on the Gulf of Mexico at Galena Park, Texas. Defendant has conceded liability and the proper measure of damages is the only question remaining.
A joint survey of the damages the St. Panteleimon allegedly suffered from the collision was undertaken on June 19, 1975.1 The team of three surveyors prepared estimates of the cost of repair but determined that the St. Panteleimon remained seaworthy and that the alleged collision damages would not require immediate attention. Since at the time of the collision the St. Panteleimon was under charter to a third party at the rate of $3,800 per day, the decision was made to keep the ship in operation and to defer repairs until her next regularly scheduled dry-docking.
Before, however, the St. Panteleimon was docked for regular maintenance and before any repair of the alleged collision damages was attempted, the ship's owner encountered financial difficulties which resulted in the ship's forced sale at public auction in November of 1975. Under the new owners, the ship, renamed the Michelle F, continued sailing for a brief time in her damaged condition, and was finally dry-docked for maintenance and repairs in early 1976.
Strictly, the measure of recovery for the owner of a vessel damaged by the negligence of another is the difference in value of the ship before and after the collision,2 but the cost of necessary repairs and demurrage, profits lost while repairs are being made, have long been accepted as its equivalent. The Pocohantas, 109 F.2d 929 (2d Cir. 1940); Pan-American Pet. and Transp. Co. v. United States, 27 F.2d 684 (2d Cir. 1928). Since the cost of restoring a damaged vessel to its prior condition is effectively a measure of the reduction in the ship's value, the fact that no repairs or only partial repairs are actually made will not defeat the owner's right to recovery. Bleakley Transp. Co. v. Colonial Sand & Stone Co., 245 F.2d 576 (2d Cir. 1957).
The most reliable source as to the cost of repairing the St. Panteleimon is the joint survey conducted only four days after the collision.3 Roy Kanapaux, who attended the June 19, 1975 survey on behalf of the St. Panteleimon's owner, testified at trial and proved a highly competent and credible witness. His estimate at the time of the survey was that repair of the damages allegedly caused by the collision would require the St. Panteleimon to be docked for nine days and cost a total of $42,100, broken down as follows:
1. Steel—Plating $ 10,000.00
2. Fairing (Internals) 2,000.00
3. Removals and Replacements
in Messroom 4,000.00
4. Removals and Replacements
in Storeroom and Reefer
Boxes and Repairs 5,000.00
5. Examination and Repair to
Stripping Pump 1,000.00
6. Bulkhead Flange, No. 3 Port
Center and No. 1 Port Wing
Tank; Port Side Rub Guard 1,100.00
7. Mooring Lines 6,000.00
8. Common Charges (charges associated
with placing ship in
dry-dock and preparing her
for repair) 13,000.00
The defendant has not challenged the basic credibility of the Kanapaux survey but has raised a number of objections to the survey's adequacy as a measure of plaintiffs' damages. It contends first that damage items five and six were not proximately caused by the collision. With regard to item five, Kanapaux's testimony indicated that the St. Panteleimon's stripping pump was damaged when it was started by the crew immediately after the collision. Defendant argues, and the court agrees, that under those circumstances the collision, though perhaps the precipitating factor, was not the legal cause of the damage to the pump. Since there is no evidence that the conditions created by the collision were such as to make damage to the pump a likelihood, I conclude that the pump's improper operation by the crew or pre-existing damage were responsible for its condition, not the collision.
With respect to item six, external damage to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Great Lakes Bus. Trust v. M/T Orange Sun
...Cir.1982); Compania Pelineon De Navegacion, S.A. v. Texas Petroleum Co., 540 F.2d 53, 56 (2d Cir.1976); Demetrius Maritime Co., Ltd. v. The Connecticut, 463 F.Supp. 1108 (S.D.N.Y.1979). Here, the evidence is strongly supportive of the Court's findings that the 194 day repair period and the ......
-
Bouchard Transp. Co. Inc. v. Tug Ocean Prince, 946
...owner's repairs extended time of detention, but only detention allocable to collision repairs allowed); Demetrius Maritime Co. v. S/T "Connecticut", 463 F.Supp. 1108, 1111 (S.D.N.Y.1979) (nonnecessary repairs) ("(P)laintiffs may recover only to the extent that repair of the collision damage......
- Garcia v. Califano
-
Ryan Marine Serv. Inc v. Hudson Drydocks Inc
...when but for the accident and subsequent repair the VICKSBURG would have been out of service. See Demetrius Maritime Co. v. S/T "Connecticut, " 463 F.Supp. 1108, 1111 (S.D.N. Y. 1979) ("If collision repairs are to be made while a ship would in any event be out of commission, earnings that w......