Home/S.D. New York/Compania Punta Alta, S.A. v. Dalzell

Compania Punta Alta, S.A. v. Dalzell

162 F. Supp. 926, 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4174
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedMay 28, 1958
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 162 F. Supp. 926 (Compania Punta Alta, S.A. v. Dalzell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Compania Punta Alta, S.A. v. Dalzell, 162 F. Supp. 926, 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4174 (S.D.N.Y. 1958).

Opinion

DIMOCK, District Judge.

Respondents except to the report of Paul E. Lockwood, Esq., who was appointed, pursuant to an interlocutory decree of this court dated February 29, 1952, Commissioner to ascertain and compute damages.

The controversy arose out of a collision which occurred on December 11, 1946, between the S. S. Marjory, owned [928]*928by Compañía Punta Alta, S. A., hereinafter libelant, and the S. S. Joseph E. Wing, a dead ship in tow of four tugs owned by Lloyd H. Dalzell, hereinafter respondent. The only physical damage resulting from the collision was that sustained by libelant, the live ship. Temporary and then permanent repairs were made to the ship and, after the temporary repairs had been completed, libelant asserted its right to general average contribution. Security was obtained from insured cargo but not from uninsured.

On May 4, 1948, libelant brought this libel against respondents, the four tugs and their owner, for damages. Thereafter Insurance Company of North America and others, as insurers of part of the cargo on the live ship, brought a libel against respondent for recovery of that cargo’s contributions in general average. Respondent filed a cross-libel against libelant for recoupment in the event of a recovery by the insurers against respondent. The suits were consolidated.

In a general average adjustment dated July 31, 1950, it was determined that tha insured cargo’s share of the damage was $6,653.62. This sum libelant collected from the insurers. The uninsured cargo’s share of the damage was determined to be $4,311.36 but it was not collected by libelant.

The decree of February 29, 1952, determined that libelant and respondent were both to blame and provided for equal division of damages. It further directed that the insurers should recover their damages from respondent and that the amount which would be paid by respondent to reimburse the insurers pursuant to this direction should be included by respondent in the amount of the damage to be shared equally between it and libelant.

The conclusions reached by the Commissioner may be tabulated as follows:

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

Related

Master Shipping Agency, Inc. v. M. S. Farida
571 F.2d 131 (Second Circuit, 1978)
Master Shipping Agency, Inc. v. M. S. Farida, Her Engines, Boilers, Etc. And Norton Line, Third-Party Stockholms Rederi-Aktielbolag Svea, Third-Party v. Court Carpentry & Marine Contractors Co., and International Terminal Operating Co., Third-Party And
571 F.2d 131 (Second Circuit, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
162 F. Supp. 926, 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/compania-punta-alta-sa-v-dalzell-nysd-1958.