Bestoso v. U. S. Mail Steamship Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Bestoso v. U. S. Mail Steamship Co.

9 La. Ann. 268

DecidedApril 15, 1854

StatusPublished

This text of 9 La. Ann. 268 (Bestoso v. U. S. Mail Steamship Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bestoso v. U. S. Mail Steamship Co., 9 La. Ann. 268 (La. 1854).

Pincite

Opinion

Ogden, J.

From the evidence which is very conflicting, it might be considered doubtful whether the plaintiffs’ boat was moored in a proper place at the time of the injury; the testimony, however, preponderates on that point. The District Judge came to that conclusion, and we are not satisfied he erred in so doing in favor of the plaintiffs, as the defendants have not shown that the accident was Unavoidable with due precautionary measures on their part, we are of opinion that the loss should fall on them. It has been held that steam vessels are to be regarded in the light of vessels navigating with a fair wind, that the master having the steamer under his command, both by altering the helm and-stopping the engines, it is his duty to adopt suoh precautions as to avoid collision with sailing vessels. St. John v. Paine et al., 10th Howard’s U. S. R. 557. Newton v. Stebbin, lb. 586.

This principle is more obviously correct when applied to a collision by a steam vessel with a sailing vessel while moored at the wharf, because the duty of avoiding a collision is more easily performed by the steamer in such a case, than when the vessel she is approaching is under sail.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ogden, J.

From the evidence which is very conflicting, it might be considered doubtful whether the plaintiffs’ boat was moored in a proper place at the time of the injury; the testimony, however, preponderates on that point. The District Judge came to that conclusion, and we are not satisfied he erred in so doing in favor of the plaintiffs, as the defendants have not shown that the accident was Unavoidable with due precautionary measures on their part, we are of opinion that the loss should fall on them. It has been held that steam vessels are to be regarded in the light of vessels navigating with a fair wind, that the master having the steamer under his command, both by altering the helm and-stopping the engines, it is his duty to adopt suoh precautions as to avoid collision with sailing vessels. St. John v. Paine et al., 10th Howard’s U. S. R. 557. Newton v. Stebbin, lb. 586.

This principle is more obviously correct when applied to a collision by a steam vessel with a sailing vessel while moored at the wharf, because the duty of avoiding a collision is more easily performed by the steamer in such a case, than when the vessel she is approaching is under sail.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 La. Ann. 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bestoso-v-u-s-mail-steamship-co-la-1854.