Home/Fourth Circuit/Latex Construction Co. v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.

Latex Construction Co. v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.

442 F.2d 450, 1971 A.M.C. 1930
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 3, 1971
DocketNo. 14488
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 442 F.2d 450 (Latex Construction Co. v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.) 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
Latex Construction Co. v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., 442 F.2d 450, 1971 A.M.C. 1930 (4th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

SOBELOFF, Senior Circuit Judge:

On the morning of August 7, 1966, the steamship HONG KONG CLIPPER struck a drydoek while approaching her assigned berth at the Columbus Street Terminal at Charleston Harbor, South Carolina. The central question in this case is which of three defendants was guilty of negligence proximately contributing to the mishap.

The District Court placed sole responsibility on Latex Construction Company, owner of the dredge NATCHEZ which was blocking part of the normal approach channel to the harbor.1 It is [452]*452our conclusion that Arthur J. Jenkins, pilot on the HONG KONG CLIPPER, was also guilty of negligence contributing to the accident.

I

Charleston Harbor2 runs roughly in a north and south direction, the northern portion angling slightly to the northwest. The Columbus Street Terminal, where the HONG KONG CLIPPER was to dock, is the furthest north docking area in the harbor and is located just opposite the southern tip of Drum Island. Because of the presence of Drum Island and shallow water to the south of the island, the Columbus Street Terminal cannot be approached directly from the. east; access is by means of Town Creek Lower Reach to the south or Town Creek Upper Reach to the north. Since the channel from the open sea approaches from the southeast, the route to the Columbus Street Terminal is shorter by several miles if the approach is made from the south by means of Town Creek Lower Reach rather than from the north which entails circling Drum Island.

South of Drum Island and the adjacent shallow water, and east of the southern portion of Town Creek Lower Reach lies Customhouse Reach. Because there is a second, smaller island to the south of Customhouse Reach, ships approaching from the sea must steer a west-northwest course through Customhouse Reach and then turn to starboard in order to head up Town Creek Lower Reach toward the Columbus Street Terminal. The Jacksonville Shipyards drydock is just opposite the “corner” where this turn is made — roughly one thousand yards south of the Columbus Street Terminal.

At the time of the accident from which this legal action arises, the dredge NATCHEZ was situated in the channel at the “corner” of Customhouse Reach and Town Creek Lower Reach. Because the NATCHEZ was occupying a portion of the channel, Pilot Jenkins • aboard the HONG KONG CLIPPER was forced to make a wider starboard turn than usual and in doing so came in contact with the drydock before he was able to complete the turn and steady on a course up Town Creek Lower Reach.

Jacksonville Shipyards commenced this action in rem against the HONG KONG CLIPPER, and in personam against Overseas Maritime Company as owner of the ship. Overseas Maritime impleaded Latex Construction Company, owner of the NATCHEZ. Latex in turn impleaded Pilot Jenkins, against whom Overseas Maritime filed a cross-complaint. Jacksonville Shipyards is technically no longer interested in the outcome of this litigation because Overseas Maritime and Latex Construction have paid the $255,000 agreed upon by the parties as the amount of damages to the drydock. However, before it can be determined under appropriate legal principles which of the three defendants should ultimately bear the cost, it is necessary to determine which of the three defendants are at fault. As previously noted, the District Court found error only in the actions of Latex Construction.

II

The District Court was clearly correct in its determination that the dredge was negligent in its actions and that “if not solely responsible, it certainly contributed proximately to the collision.” 3 Because on appeal Latex does not attempt to escape liability altogether, but argues that the accident was the joint fault of the dredge and the pilot, we adopt the District Court’s discussion of the faults of the dredge without further elaboration here.4

We also uphold the District Court’s finding that “the Captain and crew of the HONG KONG CLIPPER [453]*453were not guilty of any negligence contributing proximately to the collision,” 5 since the ship was under the sole command of Pilot Jenkins throughout the period with which we are concerned here. This brings us to the question whether Jenkins was guilty of any negligence in his handling of the ship — as the District Court well characterized it, “[t]he most difficult question in this case.”6

In assessing Jenkins’ actions two distinct questions are raised: (1) Was he negligent in taking the ship through Customhouse Reach rather than going. around Drum Island? and (2) Was he negligent in his handling of the ship once he embarked on the route by way of Customhouse Reach and Town Creek Lower Reach ? Because we conclude that Jenkins erred in failing to take the longer route around Drum Island, we need not consider his handling of the ship once he selected the other route.

Pilot Jenkins boarded the HONG KONG CLIPPER near the sea buoy at 7:40 a. m. During the subsequent maneuvers of the ship his sole means of communication was a portable radio with which he could contact only the pilot boat; all communications with other vessels had to be relayed through the pilot boat. As the ship proceeded in toward Customhouse Reach, Jenkins inquired of the dredge, through the pilot boat, Whether the channel was clear and on which side he should pass the dredge. The pilot boat informed him that the dredge said the channel was clear and that he should pass starboard to starboard.

However, Jenkins was also told by the pilot boat that the tugs waiting to assist the ship in docking advised that he should “[g]o around the island.” When Jenkins inquired as to why he should go that way, the pilot boat indicated that it would try to find out. The only answer that Jenkins received was a non-responsive and ambiguous message that the tugs said, “Okay.” He sought no further clarification.

As the HONG KONG CLIPPER neared Customhouse Reach, Jenkins blew one long whistle blast as an inquiry to the dredge whether the channel was clear and on which side the dredge should be passed. The dredge responded with two whistle blasts, directing the ship to pass starboard to starboard. Jenkins proceeded into Customhouse Reach, and passed the dredge starboard to starboard, but in doing so failed to clear the Jacksonville Shipyards drydock.

On the morning of these events there was a light wind blowing from the west-southwest. Visibility was good and clear for a distance of several miles. Jenkins, approaching from the east-southeast, should have had no difficulty perceiving the extent of the dredge’s southward protrusion into the channel. Although gauging the westward obstruction of Town Creek Lower Reach would have been more difficult, visibility was good, and Jenkins was perched at a favorable vantage point 65 feet above the water. Also, he was familiar with the harbor and accustomed to visually judging distances for making safe turns through Customhouse Reach to berth at various docking areas in the harbor. As the District Court noted “a careful and cautious visual inspection at this point by the pilot should have indicated to him that he would not have the full channel of Town Creek Lower Reach within which he could maneuver his entrance into such Reach.” 7

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

Related

Latex Construction Company v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.
442 F.2d 450 (Third Circuit, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
442 F.2d 450, 1971 A.M.C. 1930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/latex-construction-co-v-jacksonville-shipyards-inc-ca4-1971.