PETITION OF WATERMAN STEAMSHIP CORPORATION

• Citation: 265 F. Supp. 595
• Decision Date: 04 August 1966
• Docket Number: No. 62-1024.,62-1024.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
• Parties: Petition of WATERMAN STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, a corporation, owner of the vessel S.S. CHICKASAW, for exoneration from and limitation of liability.

265 F. Supp. 595

Petition of WATERMAN STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, a corporation, owner of the vessel S.S. CHICKASAW, for exoneration from and limitation of liability.

No. 62-1024.

United States District Court S. D. California, C. D.

August 4, 1966.

Graham, James & Rolph, by Leo J. Vander Lans and Don A. Proudfoot, Long Beach, Cal., for Waterman Steamship Corp.

McCutchen, Black, Verleger & Shea, by Philip K. Verleger, Los Angeles, Cal., by Manuel Real, Eugene Kramer, Los Angeles, Cal., John F. Meadows and Henry Haugen, Admiralty & Shipping Section, U. S. Department of Justice, San Francisco, Cal., Fletcher & Rauch, by Robert A. Fletcher, Los Angeles, Cal., Bigham, Englar, Jones & Houston, by John W. R. Zisgen, New York City, for claimants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

CURTIS, District Judge.

On February 7, 1962, the steamship CHICKASAW, owned by the petitioner, Waterman Steamship Corporation, ran hard aground on Santa Rosa Island. She was returning from Japan, bound for Los Angeles, and was attempting a landfall on the south light of the island. It was a dark and rainy night with visibility about one mile, and the captain had been without benefit of a celestial observation for two days because of overcast. There was a substantial loss of her two million dollar cargo, although we are not now concerned with the actual amount thereof. Nevertheless, a number of admiralty actions have been filed, all of which are concerned with the grounding, but in which further proceedings have been stayed pending disposition of the present matter.

Now before the court is a petition for exoneration from liability under § 1304 of the The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (46 U.S.C.A. § 1300 et seq.) or, in the alternative, a limitation of liability under 46 U.S.C.A. § 183.

In seeking exoneration from liability the petitioner contends that the grounding was the sole result of the negligence of its own crew in the neglect and man-agreement of the ship, entitling petitioner to exoneration under COGSA. That the ship's crew was negligent is apparent from the evidence, so apparent in fact that the cargo claimants do not strenuously contend to the contrary. No effort was made to check or repair the fathometer, notwithstanding the fact that it had been reported out of order. The deep sea sounder, whether operative or not, had been chiseled from the deck of the vessel and sold for junk, while in the Orient. No deviation card had been prepared for the radio direction finder in recent years, and there is no indication in the evidence that any deviation at any quadrant was known or calculated in determining radio fixes. The radio fixes obtained shortly before the tragedy were so inconsistent with each other that a reasonable person, especially one with the captain's experience, should have known that he had no accurate knowledge of the location of his vessel. Yet on came the CHICKASAW into the unknown on a foul night, with poor visibility, and at 16.5 knots, its full cruising speed. No more need be said about the crew's negligence.

The cargo claimants contend, however, that the vessel was unseaworthy in some respects which contributed to the grounding, which, if true, would of course prevent petitioner's exoneration. The cargo claimants argue that the CHICKASAW was unseaworthy in that its radar was inoperable. This condition occurred after leaving the home port, and several attempts were made in the Orient to replace a defective cam, but none could...