Koch-Ellis Marine Contractors, Inc. v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans

218 F.2d 771, 1955 A.M.C. 555, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 2834
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 28, 1955
DocketNo. 15029
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 218 F.2d 771 (Koch-Ellis Marine Contractors, Inc. v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans) 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
Koch-Ellis Marine Contractors, Inc. v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans, 218 F.2d 771, 1955 A.M.C. 555, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 2834 (5th Cir. 1955).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal in admiralty from an interlocutory decree, based on findings, Sewerage & Water Board v. The Joe L. Hill, D.C., 118 F.Supp. 951,1 that unattended, wild and heavily loaded riv[772]*772er barges KE17 and KE22, owned by respondent-appellant, collided with and caused damage to a cluster piling and monorail, a part of its River Water Intake Wharf, and that respondent’s negligence was the proximate cause thereof.

Here, urging upon us that this appeal is a trial de novo 2 and this court must draw its own inferences from the facts, appellant insists that there is no direct evidence whatever, and no circumstantial evidence having sufficient probative force, to show that the barges were in collision with the cluster, and the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law3 must be rejected as un[773]*773supported by the evidence and, therefore, unwarranted.

We do not think so. On the contrary, we are of the clear opinion that the case was peculiarly a fact case and that the trial court’s findings are well supported. Indeed, we think that the finding “not proven” which appellant in effect insists is all that the record will support, would have been wholly unwarranted. Matters standing thus, it will serve no useful purpose for us to discuss and analyze the evidence, as it is sufficient to say that, upon the findings and conclusions of the district judge, the decree is affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
218 F.2d 771, 1955 A.M.C. 555, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 2834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koch-ellis-marine-contractors-inc-v-sewerage-water-board-of-new-ca5-1955.