The E. Luckenbach
| Citation | 93 F. 841 |
| Decision Date | 02 May 1899 |
| Docket Number | 299. |
| Parties | THE E. LUCKENBACH. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit) |
Robert M. Hughes, for appellant.
Floyd Hughes, for appellee.
Thomas H. Willcox, for owner of barge.
Before GOFF, Circuit Judge, and MORRIS, District Judge.
In the early morning of June 15, 1896, the schooner J. B. Van Dusen bound from New York to Norfolk, light, and barge No. 2, of the New York, Philadelphia & Norfolk Railroad Company, then in tow of the tug E. Luckenbach, bound from Norfolk to Cape Charles, came into collision between Old Point and Thimble Light. The schooner, shortly after the accident, sunk on Hampton Bar, and the libel in this case was filed against the tug and barge to recover for the damages occasioned by the collision. The J. B. Van Dusen was a three-masted schooner of about 222 tons burden, with a crew of six men, consisting of the master, mate, the cook, and three seamen, and was making about six miles an hour, with seven of her nine sails set. The wind was from the east, the night was clear, and the tide ebb. Her master was in command, and his watch, consisting of two seamen, one at the wheel and the other on the lookout were at their respective stations. The lights, properly placed, out, were burning brightly. The tug E. Luckenbach was 90 feet long by 15 feet beam, with a crew of nine men, four of whom were on duty. The barge, which was 215 feet long by 42 feet beam, was in tow of the tug, and was loaded with freight cars. The tug and its tow were making about seven miles an hour. The libelant claimed that, as the vessels approached, they were showing their port lights to each other, and that when they were about 300 yards apart the tug changed its course so as to cross the schooner's bow thereby showing for a short time to the navigators of the schooner both lights, and then shutting in its red light; that the schooner held her course until the vessels were about 100 feet apart, when she luffed under a starboard helm, and succeeded in clearing the tug; that the barge, which was 480 feet behind the tug, had not been able to change her course as rapidly as the tug, and was still showing her port light; that it was impossible for the schooner, situated as the vessels then were, to clear the barge by continuing under a starboard helm, and that, therefore, her master, in the hope of avoiding collision, put his vessel under a helm hard a-port, but that almost immediately after passing the tug the bow of the schooner came in contact with the starboard corner of the barge. The master of the tug claims, as does also the master of the barge, that the vessels approached each other green to green; that the schooner was a point and a half on the starboard bow of the tug, moving on a parallel course, with the barge exactly behind the tug; that the vessels would have cleared each other fully 400 feet, and no collision would have occurred, had not the schooner hard ported when about even with the tug, thereby running into the barge. The court below found that the barge was not at fault, and that the tug alone was responsible for the collision, and entered a decree in favor of the libelant for the damages causes thereby. From that decree this appeal is prosecuted.
There is the conflict in the testimony usually found in cases of collision, the contending interests being diametrically opposite in their claims, as well as in the testimony their respective representatives have given relative thereto. Of the tug's crew of nine men, four of whom were on duty at the time of the collision, only two were examined as witnesses. The entire crew of the schooner, as also of the barge, were produced and examined, either by deposition or in open court; the material witnesses on both sides testifying before the judge who...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Petterson Lighterage & T. Corp. v. New York Central R. Co.
... ... "the rule prevails that the judgment of the district court will not be reversed when the result depends alone upon questions of fact depending upon conflicting evidence, unless there is a decided preponderance against the judgment." ... The E. Luckenbach, 4 Cir., 1899, 93 F. 841, 842, 843 ... "Unless we find from the record that the decision is clearly against the evidence, we will not — as the questions of fact are to be ascertained from conflicting testimony — reverse the decree of the judge." ... The Oscar B, ... ...
-
The Richmond
... ... the failure of the ship to produce members of her crew, who ... could or should have been able to throw light upon the cause ... of the collision, is noteworthy, Kirby v. Tallmadge, ... 160 U.S. 379, 16 Sup.Ct. 349, 40 L.Ed. 463; The Georgetown ... (D.C.) 135 F. 854, 855, 859; The Luckenbach (D.C.) 144 F ... 980; The M. E. Luckenbach (D.C.) 174 F. 265, 269 (C.C.A. 4th ... Cir.); Id. 178 F. 1004, 101 C.C.A. 663. Only the ... ship's master, and two men who were aft, and knew nothing ... material as to the occurrence, and the pilot, were called by ... her to testify. Neither the ... ...
-
Whitney v. Olsen
... ... 54, 56 F ... 621, 624. The same rule has been followed in other circuits, ... and in the supreme court. The City of Naples, 16 C.C.A. 421, ... 69 F. 794, 796; The Brandywine, 31 C.C.A. 187, 87 F. 652; ... City of Cleveland v. Chisholm, 33 C.C.A. 157, 90 F ... 431, 434; The E. Luckenbach, 35 C.C.A. 628, 93 F. 841, 843; ... Compania De. Navigacion La Flecha v. Brauer, 168 ... U.S. 104, 123, 18 Sup.Ct. 12, 42 L.Ed. 398; Stuart v ... Hayden, 169 U.S. 1, 14, 18 Sup.Ct. 274, 42 L.Ed. 639; ... The Carib Prince, 170 U.S. 655, 18 Sup.Ct. 753, 42 L.Ed ... Under ... this ... ...
-
The Anaces
... ... is treated with, great respect. The Lucy and The Spring ... Garden, 20 C.C.A. 660, 74 F. 572, 42 U.S.App. 100; The ... Bowden, The Decatur H. Miller, and The Venus, 24 C.C.A. 267, ... 78 F. 649, 42 U.S.App. 374; The E. Luckenbach, 35 C.C.A. 628, ... 93 F. 841 ... The ... testimony has been carefully reviewed, and this court has ... reached the same conclusion with the court below. The master ... of the ship, a stranger in the port of loading, consulted the ... firm, which was largely engaged in the export ... ...