The West Hartland

• Decision Date: 08 February 1924
• Docket Number: 6426.
• Citation: 297 F. 330
• Parties: THE WEST HARTLAND.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington

297 F. 330

THE WEST HARTLAND.

No. 6426.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Northern Division.

February 8, 1924

Bronson Robinson & Jones, of Seattle, Wash., for petitioner.

Grosscup & Morrow, Bogle, Merritt & Bogle, and Huffer, Hayden & Bucey all of Seattle, Wash., for claimants.

NETERER District Judge.

'It is well settled that the value, which is the measure of the owners' liability, is the value of the vessel immediately after the collision. ' Norwich Co. v. Wright, 13 Wall. 104, 20 L.Ed. 585; In re Wright et al., Fed. Cas No. 18,066, 30 Fed.Cas. 659; Boston Marine Ins. Co v. Metropolitan Redwood Lbr. Co., 197 F. 703, 117 C.C.A. 97; Pac. Coast Co. v. Reynolds, 114 F. 877, 52 C.C.A. 497.

The value of the vessel immediately after the collision obviously was its value in a seaworthy condition, less the cost of repairs. Judge Choate, in Re Wright et al., supra, at page 660, said:

'The additional value, which the owners have put upon the vessel by repairing her, constituted no part of her at the time the damage was sustained.'

Judge Ross for the Circuit Court in Pacific Coast Co. v. Reynolds, supra, held that the expense of the owner in releasing a vessel from the rocks and having her towed to port must be deducted from the value of the vessel as she was lying, stranded on the reef-- not only the expense incurred, but also an allowance on account of the risk and hazard, and this was affirmed in Boston Marine Ins. Co. v. Met. Redwood Lumber Co., supra; in this case Judge Gilbert said that the value of the ship on limitation of liability is her value immediately after the collision, less the expense of her salvage and an allowance for the risk and hazard affecting the rescue. To the same effect is The Abbie C. Stubbs (D.C.) 28 F. 719.

There being no contention as to the value of the repairs, it would seem that equity would not be much concerned with the fact that the vessel was not appraised and released on stipulation prior to sale. I think this is sustained by The Captain Jack (D.C.) 162 F. 808, as well as on principle. Equity is remedial justice and is concerned with the rights of the parties. 'Equity delights in justice.'

In the absence of anything to the contrary, the sale is conclusive in establishing the value of the vessel; it not being denied that the repairs made were not reasonably worth the sum expended, and the court having heretofore found by decision of September 21, 1923, that the value of the vessel immediately following the collision was the same as at the time of surrender, plus the repairs. Upon the record and as presently advised, I think the claim should be allowed.

On Rehearing of Petition as to Repairs.

On rehearing it is asserted that the basis for the court's assumption that there was no denial that the repairs were not worth the sum expended is erroneous, in that there is no evidence that the amount of the repairs added an equivalent value to the ship and that such burden resting upon the petitioner, and no proof being offered, the value is not established and that the equities are all in favor of the collision claimants, since they moved promptly to enforce their maritime liens against the vessel, which has been held at fault, long prior to the added repairs by the petitioner, and that the only right to recover, if any, on the part of the petitioner, must be limited to the reserved claim in the petition for limitation for 'such an amount of money as was necessary to preserve said 'West Hartland' from loss or destruction.'

The court in its decision said:

'There being no contention as to the value of the repairs, it would seem that equity would not be much concerned with the fact that the vessel was not appraised and released on stipulation prior to sale. * * * Equity is remedial justice and is concerned with the rights of the parties. ' Equity delights in justice."

With the petition for rehearing is presented, and considered under stipulation of the parties, invoice on repairs and specifications for repairs and renewals, from which it appears repairs and alterations were made, in which are included expense of wharfage, towage, dockage, water for testing and refilling tanks...