Hills v. Florida

E.D. New York

Hills v. Florida

69 F. 159, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York

DecidedMay 27, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 69 F. 159 (Hills v. Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hills v. Florida, 69 F. 159, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32 (E.D.N.Y. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

BENEDICT, District Judge.

This is an action to recover of the steamship Florida for alleged damage to 383 bags of filberts, caused by coal dust upon the filberts. These filberts were part of a consignment shipped from the port of Messina on board the steamship Florida, which arrived in New York about August 5, 1890. Upon their discharge on the dock a large number of the bags were found to be covered with coal dust, and considerably damaged thereby. The allegation of the libel is that the cargo in question was damaged by coal dust from the bunkers of the ship permeating said bags, and damaging their contents, and that the same was caused by negligence and improper attention on the part of the master of the vessel, Ms agents and servants. Although some point has been made upon the testimony as to the sufficiency of the evidence to show that the filberts in question came by the steamship Florida, the testimony, taken together, leaves no doubt on that point; and it is found that the filberts were transported in the steamship Florida, and that they were damaged by the coal dust, as alleged in the libel. It is (rue that the evidence shows good stowage of the filberts on board the [160]*160ship, and makes it plain that no coal dust from the hunkers could have reached them while so stowed; but this fact, taken with the fact that the filberts, when landed, were covered with coal dust, would warrant the inference that the filberts were permitted to come in contact with coal dust while discharging. But the case is not left to depend upon this inference. There is positive proof in the case that the filberts, while discharging, were placed by the bunkers of the ship where the coal was put down, and that coal dust blew right through the bags of filberts. It must therefore be found that the filberts were damaged by negligence on the part of the ship. For such negligence as this the ship is not absolved by the terms of the bill of lading, under the law of this country. Let there be a decree for the libelants, with an order of reference to ascertain the amount.

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

BENEDICT, District Judge.

This is an action to recover of the steamship Florida for alleged damage to 383 bags of filberts, caused by coal dust upon the filberts. These filberts were part of a consignment shipped from the port of Messina on board the steamship Florida, which arrived in New York about August 5, 1890. Upon their discharge on the dock a large number of the bags were found to be covered with coal dust, and considerably damaged thereby. The allegation of the libel is that the cargo in question was damaged by coal dust from the bunkers of the ship permeating said bags, and damaging their contents, and that the same was caused by negligence and improper attention on the part of the master of the vessel, Ms agents and servants. Although some point has been made upon the testimony as to the sufficiency of the evidence to show that the filberts in question came by the steamship Florida, the testimony, taken together, leaves no doubt on that point; and it is found that the filberts were transported in the steamship Florida, and that they were damaged by the coal dust, as alleged in the libel. It is (rue that the evidence shows good stowage of the filberts on board the [160]*160ship, and makes it plain that no coal dust from the hunkers could have reached them while so stowed; but this fact, taken with the fact that the filberts, when landed, were covered with coal dust, would warrant the inference that the filberts were permitted to come in contact with coal dust while discharging. But the case is not left to depend upon this inference. There is positive proof in the case that the filberts, while discharging, were placed by the bunkers of the ship where the coal was put down, and that coal dust blew right through the bags of filberts. It must therefore be found that the filberts were damaged by negligence on the part of the ship. For such negligence as this the ship is not absolved by the terms of the bill of lading, under the law of this country. Let there be a decree for the libelants, with an order of reference to ascertain the amount.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 F. 159, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hills-v-florida-nyed-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack