Coastwise Transp. Co. v. Baltimore Steam Packet Co.

Fourth Circuit

Coastwise Transp. Co. v. Baltimore Steam Packet Co.

148 F. 837, 78 C.C.A. 527, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4383

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 8, 1906

DocketNo. 649

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 148 F. 837 (Coastwise Transp. Co. v. Baltimore Steam Packet Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coastwise Transp. Co. v. Baltimore Steam Packet Co., 148 F. 837, 78 C.C.A. 527, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4383 (4th Cir. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s schooner, Henry W. Cramp, and the appellee’s steamer, Georgia, were in collision on the morning of January 31, 1904, in the vicinity of Old Point Wharf. At the time of the collision the Cramp was at anchor, while the Georgia was on her way to Norfolk. The steamer was considerably injured by the collision, and this is a libel in personam against the owner of the Cramp to recover damages. The court below found that at the time of the collision there was a fog in that vicinity, that the Cramp was not ringing a fog bell, and that the navigation of the Georgia was free from fault. A decree in consonance with such finding was entered, and from it this appeal is prosecuted.

As to the condition of the weather at the time of the collision, there is a conflict in the testimony, and practically the only question at issue that the court below had to determine was whether or not fog signals should have been given by the Cramp. It is admitted that the Cramp did not sound any such signals. All of the libelant’s witnesses were examined in open court, as was also the master of the respondent. The rule is well established, and no authorities are necessary to support it, that under such circumstances an appellate court will hesitate long before reversing a decree based on questions of fact so found. The opinion of the court, which has our approval, is found in (D. C.) 139 Fed. 777.

There is no error in the decree complained of, and the same is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s schooner, Henry W. Cramp, and the appellee’s steamer, Georgia, were in collision on the morning of January 31, 1904, in the vicinity of Old Point Wharf. At the time of the collision the Cramp was at anchor, while the Georgia was on her way to Norfolk. The steamer was considerably injured by the collision, and this is a libel in personam against the owner of the Cramp to recover damages. The court below found that at the time of the collision there was a fog in that vicinity, that the Cramp was not ringing a fog bell, and that the navigation of the Georgia was free from fault. A decree in consonance with such finding was entered, and from it this appeal is prosecuted.

As to the condition of the weather at the time of the collision, there is a conflict in the testimony, and practically the only question at issue that the court below had to determine was whether or not fog signals should have been given by the Cramp. It is admitted that the Cramp did not sound any such signals. All of the libelant’s witnesses were examined in open court, as was also the master of the respondent. The rule is well established, and no authorities are necessary to support it, that under such circumstances an appellate court will hesitate long before reversing a decree based on questions of fact so found. The opinion of the court, which has our approval, is found in (D. C.) 139 Fed. 777.

There is no error in the decree complained of, and the same is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 F. 837, 78 C.C.A. 527, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coastwise-transp-co-v-baltimore-steam-packet-co-ca4-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack