The Helios

12 F. 732, 1882 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided June 3, 1882·Published·Cited by 18 cases

Opinion

Brown, D. J.

I cannot entertain any doubt that it was negligence in those having charge of the Helios to leave the chain-locker hatch open and unprotected, as the evidence shows in this case. It was not a hatch for the usual stowage of cargo, such as stevedores must at their peril look out for and are presumed to know about. It had no reference to the cargo, and the stevedores had no business with it, as the evidence shows. When the first mate told the stevedore the vessel was ready for him to proceed to stow the cargo, that was a virtual warranty against all such traps in the darker parts of the vessel, which could not be or would not be perceived in the ordinary course of stowage. The evidence doubtless shows some exaggerations, but nothing which tends to create any doubt as to the evident fact that this hole was left open and unguarded, in a dark place, [734]*734after the first- officer bad said the vessel was ready for stowing the cargo.

Decree for libellant, with costs, and reference to compute the dam ages.

See 2 Fed. Rep. 240.

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

The Helios, 12 F. 732, 1882 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136 (S.D.N.Y. 1882).

12 F. 732 (The Helios) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henry v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.
134 F. Supp. 71 (S.D. New York, 1955)
Ahlgren v. Red Star Towing & Transp. Co., Inc
214 F.2d 618 (Second Circuit, 1954)
Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn
346 U.S. 406 (Supreme Court, 1953)
Elzey v. Boston Metals Co.
56 A.2d 692 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1948)
Tysko v. Royal Mail Steam Packet Co.
81 F.2d 960 (Ninth Circuit, 1936)
The Falco
20 F.2d 362 (Second Circuit, 1927)
Hardie v. New York Harbor Dry Dock Corporation
9 F.2d 545 (Second Circuit, 1925)
The Kongosan Maru
292 F. 801 (Ninth Circuit, 1923)
Steele v. Grahl-Peterson Co.
109 N.W. 882 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)
Burrell v. Fleming
109 F. 489 (Fifth Circuit, 1901)
The Anaces
93 F. 240 (Fourth Circuit, 1899)
Craig v. The Saratoga
87 F. 349 (E.D. New York, 1898)
Cliffe v. Pacific Mail S. S. Co.
81 F. 809 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California, 1897)
Jensen v. The Joseph B. Thomas
81 F. 578 (N.D. California, 1897)
Ferguson v. The Terrier
73 F. 265 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1896)