The Neptuno
| Decision Date | 04 April 1887 |
| Parties | THE NEPTUNO. v. THE NEPTUNO, etc. SULLIVAN |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Jas K. Hill, Wing & Shoudy, and H. Putnam, for libelant.
Sidney Chubb, for claimant.
On the thirtieth of March, 1886, the British steamer Neptuno, being at the port of Graytown unloading cargo, the libelant, a youth 18 years old, was directed by the mate to tend the sling at the hatch between-decks. While engaged in this work a load of about 300 pounds, which had been hoisted by the tackle nearly up to the main-yard, fell upon him, and knocked him insensible. On being picked up, his right forearm was found to be fractured, one of the bones of the right hand was broken, and a serious rupture disclosed in each groin. I think the evidence shows that the captain offered him hospital treatment at Graytown, but the libelant preferred to come to New York with the ship. When the steamer arrived here, on the sixteenth of April, he was still weak and disabled. He could not turn his arm. On the 20th, while the master's arrangements for procuring him admission to the Long Island hospital were still incomplete, the libelant being then ashore with the master, who was then actually engaged in perfecting those arrangements for admission, some friends took the libelant in charge, and obtained his entry into the same hospital on the 22d. Under these circumstances I cannot regard the libelant's conduct as amounting to desertion exonerating the ship.
The bones of the arm, being in very bad position, had to be refractured and reset. The operation was entirely successful and the libelant was discharged on the twenty-fourth of July with the free use of his arm. He still suffers from the hernia.
The fall of the load arose from the breaking of the hook at the end of the tackle by which the sling was raised. Some negligence of the winchman and fellow-servant is suggested in allowing the tackle to be carried too far. The evidence, however, is not sufficient to allow the breaking of the hook to be ascribed to that cause. Several witnesses state that the hook, before it was used, was known to be imperfect; that it showed a plain flaw in the bottom of the curve, at the place where it broke; that, before it was used, the mate's attention was called to its insufficiency, and that he directed it to be used, saying that there was no other. The mate has not been called as a witness, though apparently...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seas Shipping Co v. Sieracki
...262, 265, 267, 83 L.Ed. 265; Mahnich v. Southern S.S. Co., 321 U.S. 96, 100, 64 S.Ct. 455, 457, 88 L.Ed. 561; and ases cited; The Neptuno, D.C., 30 F. 925; The Frank and Willie, D.C., 45 F. 494; The Julia Fowler, D.C., 49 F. 277; cf. The Edwin I. Morrison, 153 U.S. 199, 210, 14 S.Ct. 823, 8......
-
Mahnich v. Southern Co
...by the seaman's officers or fellow seamen, to supply seaworthy appliances. The Noddleburn, D.C., 28 F. 855, affirmed 30 F. 142; The Neptuno, D.C., 30 F. 925; The Frank and Willie, D.C., 45 F. 494; The Julia Fowler, D.C., 49 F. 277; Wm. Johnson & Co. v. Johansen, 5 Cir., 86 F. 886; and see T......
-
Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc, 176
...Cage, Cage, 4 Fed.Cas. page 367, No. 2,002; Halverson v. Nisen, 11 Fed.Cas. page 310, No. 5,970; The Noddleburn, D.C., 28 F. 855; The Neptuno, D.C., 30 F. 925; The Lizzie Frank, D.C., 31 F. 477; The Flowergate, D.C., 31 F. 762; The A. Heaton, C.C., 43 F. 592; The Julia Fowler, D.C., 49 F. 2......
-
Fordyce Lumber Co. v. Lynn
...1150; 49 N.E. 854; 92 N.W. 535; 88 Ark. 36; 82 S.W. 1026; 56 Kan. 109; 134 Ind. 226; 118 P. 764; 54 So. Rep. 252; 132 Ga. 221; 78 N.W. 572; 30 F. 925; 18 223; 101 N.Y. 396; 92 Ark. 350; 88 N.W. 758. 3. Recovery has been allowed for defects in simple instruments and appliances in 96 F. 446; ......