David Roger Lettsome v. The United States of America

411 F.2d 917, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12318, 1969 A.M.C. 2231
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMay 20, 1969
Docket26486_1
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 411 F.2d 917 (David Roger Lettsome v. The United States of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
David Roger Lettsome v. The United States of America, 411 F.2d 917, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12318, 1969 A.M.C. 2231 (5th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

ORIE L. PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge:

Lettsome brought this action against the United States under the Suits in Admiralty Act (46 U.S.C.A. §§ 741-752) and the Public Vessels Act (46 U.S.C.A. §§ 781-790) to recover damages for personal injuries.

The trial court found the injuries resulted from the unseaworthiness of a United States Navy motorboat (a Boston Whaler) and the negligence of the United States, and entered judgment for Lettsome. The United States has appealed.

Lettsome majored in geology at Cornell College at Mount Vernon, Iowa, and received a B.A. degree in geology from that institution. He also took a short postgraduate course at Miami University at Oxford, Ohio. After completing his education, he served as a highway engineer for the Cook County Illinois Highway Department and became proficient, through experience, in the testing of construction materials. Prior to January 23, 1965, the date on which Lett-some was injured, the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory had entered into a contract with the United States Navy to test, in accordance with the procedures of the A STM, 1 construction materials to be used by the Navy at the AUTEC Naval Base at Andros Island, Bahamas, British West Indies. On and prior to January 23, 1965, Lettsome was employed by Pittsburgh as a testing engineer to carry out such contract and to do the testing thereunder. Included in his duties were the taking and testing of water samples at all stations connected with the Base.

Lettsome was an employee under the Defense Bases Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 1651).

The living quarters area at the Base is separated from the military area by Fresh Creek, a navigable stream approximately 100 yards wide. The Navy provided transportation both ways across the creek for both civilian and naval personnel by means of an outboard-motor-driven ferry, with a capacity of eight passengers, and the Boston Whaler, an 18-foot boat, powered by a 75 H.P. Evin-rude outboard motor and an 18 H.P. outboard motor.

The Whaler was available for use by naval and civilian personnel at the Base for both business and recreational purposes.

Prior to January 23, 1965, an epidemic of hepatitis had developed among both the naval and civilian personnel at the Base and at down-range sites. The term “down-range sites” referred to installa *919 tions the Navy had under construction on Fresh Creek, south of the main Naval Base. Lettsome and his wife were among the first persons to contract the disease.

At about noon on January 23, 1965, Lt. Commander W. F. Daniel, the Base Commandant, contacted Lettsome and advised him that a United States Navy medical team had come to the Base to endeavor to determine the source of the hepatitis then prevalent at the Base and down-range sites and to administer gamma globulin as a preventative vaccine. Daniel ordered Lettsome to make himself, his staff, and his testing facilities available to the medical team. He explained to Lettsome that the medical team would want to test the water from the Navy’s own sources of supply at the Base and at down-range sites and also from the sources of supply of local people in the vicinity as far away as 12 miles from the Base, and would want to obtain water samples from all of such sources. Daniel was assured by Lett-some that he would make his automobile available to the medical team for travel to places accessible by land transportation and provide water transportation for them to reach places not accessible by land transportation. As a result of the conversation between Daniel and Lettsome on January 23, 1965, it clearly appears that it was understood by them that in compliance with Daniel’s orders Lettsome would provide the medical team with ground transportation by automobile to places accessible by land and by the Whaler to places accessible only by water, for the purpose of obtaining water samples to be tested for hepatitis bacteria and would assist them in obtaining and testing the samples.

Lettsome had planned to use the boat to take his father fishing the afternoon of January 23, 1965, but because of developing bad weather and the fact the medical team would need his assistance and the use of the boat, he had abandoned his fishing plans.

Thomas T. Gaulden, a civilian naval employee at the Base, had custody of the boat. It was also his duty to arrange for needed repairs of the motors. Sometimes a mechanic from Nassau came to the Base and repaired the motors and sometimes the motors were sent to the United States mainland to be repaired.

In order to facilitate the use of the boat, Gaulden usually left the keys at the Base Yacht Club, near which the boat was ordinarily docked, and where either civilian or naval employees at the Base could obtain them conveniently. However, if the boat or jts motors were out of order, Gaulden personally kept possession of the keys.

Upon receiving the instructions from Daniel to assist the medical team, Lett-some went to the Yacht Club to obtain the boat keys. On learning they were not there, Lettsome went back to the Base, contacted Gaulden, and asked him for the keys, explaining to him that he wanted to check out the boat and have transportation available for the medical team when it was needed.

Lettsome had used the boat the preceding Wednesday and had experienced no trouble with it. He had heard that the clutch was giving some trouble when the boat was operated at high speeds, but he had no idea what specifically was wrong with the clutch nor in what way it was malfunctioning.

When Lettsome asked Gaulden for the keys, Gaulden told Lettsome the boat “was out of commission at the present time because of the engine.”

A mechanic, who normally repaired the engines, had told Gaulden the clutch was defective. Gaulden testified, “To my knowledge, sir, we had a slipping clutch in the engine.” A slipping clutch is one that disengages the gears and leaves the engine running in neutral. Gaulden at no time told Lettsome the clutch was slipping.

Lettsome told Gaulden that he (Lett-some) would get Wilfred Mackey, the Dockmaster at the Yacht Club, to help him and he believed they could determine what was wrong with the clutch *920 and repair it, and if they could not repair it he would not use the boat.

Thereupon, Gaulden gave Lettsome the keys.

Lettsome testified he had heard a rumor “that there was some problem with the gear” — that “they were having some problems with the boat and [at] its higher speeds.”

When asked on cross-examination if he did not have “a vague idea that there was some difficulty with the gears engaging or slipping or something along that line?”, Lettsome answered, “I had no idea what it was.” When asked on cross-examination, “Did Mr. Gaulden tell you that the clutch was not operating properly, or the gear shift?”, Lettsome answered, “No.” Gaulden did not testify he had so told Lettsome.

When asked on cross-examination, “Did you tell Mr. Gaulden that you knew that the clutch, or whatever you want to call it, was not operating properly?”, Lettsome answered, “No, I told him I had heard it rumored that it was something to that effect.”

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

Related

Coumou v. USA
Fifth Circuit, 1997
Peters v. Titan Navigation Co.
857 F.2d 1342 (Ninth Circuit, 1988)
Self v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.
832 F.2d 1540 (Eleventh Circuit, 1987)
Thompson v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
621 F.2d 814 (Sixth Circuit, 1980)
Thompson v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.
621 F.2d 814 (Sixth Circuit, 1980)
Wilson M. Price v. John Mosler
483 F.2d 275 (Fifth Circuit, 1973)
Richmond Marine Panama, S.A. v. United States
350 F. Supp. 1210 (S.D. New York, 1972)
David Roger Lettsome v. United States
453 F.2d 395 (Fifth Circuit, 1971)
Billy J. Noble v. Bank Line, Ltd.
431 F.2d 520 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)
No. 29289 Summary Calendar
431 F.2d 520 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)
Guy L. Neill, Jr. v. Diamond M. Drilling Co.
426 F.2d 487 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
411 F.2d 917, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12318, 1969 A.M.C. 2231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-roger-lettsome-v-the-united-states-of-america-ca5-1969.