White Stack Towing Corporation v. Hewitt Oil Co., 6853.
Decision Date | 10 November 1954 |
Docket Number | No. 6853.,6853. |
Citation | 216 F.2d 776 |
Parties | WHITE STACK TOWING CORPORATION, a corporation, as owner and operator of the Tugs Tunker and F. L. Jenkins, Appellant, v. HEWITT OIL CO., a corporation, as owner of Hewitt Oil Terminals, in Charleston County, South Carolina, United States of America, as owner and operator of the USNS Mission Capistrano, and Tankers Company, Inc., a corporation, operating USNS Capistrano, as Agent for the United States of America, Appellees. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Charles H. Gibbs, Charleston, S. C. (Huger Sinkler and Sinkler, Gibbs & Simons, Charleston, S. C., on the brief), for appellant.
G. L. B. Rivers, Charleston, S. C. (Hagood, Rivers & Young and A. Baron Holmes, III, Charleston, S. C., on the brief), for appellee Hewitt Oil Co.
Harold A. Mouzon, Charleston, S. C. (Moore & Mouzon and B. Allston Moore, Charleston, S. C., on the brief), for appellee Tankers Co., Inc.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
Hewitt Oil Company (hereinafter called Hewitt) brought an action in admiralty in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of South Carolina against White Stack Towing Company (hereinafter called White Stack) and Tankers Company, Inc., (hereinafter called Tankers) for damages to Hewitt's oil dock installations, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of White Stack and Tankers in connection with the docking of the USNS Mission Capistrano (hereinafter called Capistrano).
The District Judge found that "the dolphins in question were properly constructed and the damages were caused solely because of the negligent operation of the ship and the tugs" by White Stack, in charge of the docking operation. A decree was entered accordingly in favor of Hewitt against White Stack for $9,386.63.
About September 15, 1951, Hewitt had completed at its property on the West bank of the Cooper River, above the Navy Yard, at Charleston, South Carolina, an oil dock installation. This installation consisted of a comparatively small T-Head dock, four breasting dolphins and four mooring dolphins. The purpose of the dock was to carry the oil line or lines connecting the discharge equipment of the ship with Hewitt's storage tanks on shore, and to afford a means of access to and handling of the comparatively simple equipment used in connecting the pipe lines to a discharging oil tanker. The dock itself was not designed for and was not capable of mooring or docking a ship.
These eight dolphins were erected in order that the tankers, while docking, might moor and maintain correct positions at the Hewitt terminal. The four breasting dolphins were erected on a line approximately three feet out from the line of the T-Head extended roughly parallel with the river, two upstream and two downstream from the T-Head, located fifty feet apart. The end of the T-Head dock facing the channel is fifty feet long. Further inshore from the face of the dock and the line of the breasting dolphins were four mooring dolphins, two for breast lines and one each for bow and stern lines. There was no equipment whatsoever such as bits, chocks or cleats on the dock itself for tying up ships.
The District Judge, we think upon proper evidence, thus described the four breasting dolphins:
In the early morning of November 11, 1951, the Capistrano had been brought up the Cooper River. The docking of the ship at the Hewitt installation had been taken over by White Stack. For that purpose, White Stack furnished Captain Futch as Docking Master and two tugs to assist in the docking operation.
When the Capistrano was a short distance downstream from the Hewitt Dock, the Docking Master took over the ship and commenced maneuvering to get the ship alongside the docks, using both the ship engines and rudder and the two tugs of White Stack. The ship's Master remained on the bridge of the Capistrano with the Docking Master. The Docking Master actually gave the orders to both the ship and tugs, but the ship's Captain remained always in charge of his ship and retained the right throughout to countermand, in case anything occurred which in his judgment endangered his ship.
When the ship had its midship point approximately opposite the center of the T-Head of the dock and about thirty feet out in the river therefrom, the Docking Master commenced to breast her in sideways with the tugs. The bow of the ship was headed upstream. The tide was flooding about five feet above low water, velocity about two and one-half knots, in a direction somewhat diagonally across the ship and tending to push her shoreward and upstream. The wind was negligible, the weather fine, visibility good and no mechanical failures involving ship or tugs occurred. About fifteen minutes passed before the ship touched any shore installation. The uncontradicted testimony shows that the sideways speed of the ship was one-forty-fourth (1/44th) of one mile per hour while she was approaching the dolphins.
The Capistrano was what is known as a T-2 tanker, 523.5 feet long, 60...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Chicago v. M/V Morgan
... ... M/V MORGAN, Kindra Lake Towing, L.P., and Kindra Lake Towing, Inc., ... Zreczny (Argued), Office of the Corporation Counsel, Appeals Division, Chicago, IL, for ... See Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Kirby Inland Marine, Inc., 296 F.3d 671, 674 ... See White Stack Towing Corp. v. Hewitt Oil Co., 216 F.2d ... ...
-
Southern Railway Company v. Neese
... ... Ellis v. Union Pacific R. Co., 329 U.S. 649, 67 S.Ct. 598, 91 L.Ed. 572; ... ...
-
Bunge Corp. v. M/V Furness Bridge
...wharfinger after a defect in a mooring cleat caused the ship to come adrift and go aground. Similarly, in White Stack Towing Corp. v. Hewitt Oil Co., 216 F.2d 776 (4th Cir. 1954), a dock owner was denied recovery against a vessel that had damaged a breasting dolphin in attempting to dock; t......
-
Georgia Ports Authority v. L/S BILDERDYK
...findings of fact state that the "vessel was approaching the dock at a very slow speed". I agree. In White Stack Towing Corporation v. Hewitt Oil Co., 216 F.2d 776, 779 (4th Cir.) the evidence was that it was "humanly impossible for a Docking Master or anyone else to make an exact four-point......