The R. B. Little

Second Circuit

The R. B. Little

188 F. 205, 110 C.C.A. 246, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4318

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 8, 1911

DocketNo. 271

StatusPublished

This text of 188 F. 205 (The R. B. Little) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

The R. B. Little, 188 F. 205, 110 C.C.A. 246, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4318 (2d Cir. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

WARD, Circuit Judge.

The barge Serviss, while in tow on the port side of the tug R. B. Little, bound from Fifty-Eighth street, North River, to Kingsbridge, Harlem River, was run upon a rock and sunk. This happened in broad daylight in waters constant[207]*207ly used with safety by vessels drawing as much as the Serviss. The District Judge dismissed the libel.

The record is most unsatisfactory. The pleadings of both parties are concededly untrue as to the place of the accident and in other material allegations. The witnesses are inaccurate, entirely unacquainted with charts and in unusual disagreement. The master of the tug is especially blameworthy for failure to report the accident to the steamboat inspectors, as he was bound by law to do. Inspectors’ Rule V (23).

The facts stated make out a prima facie case in favor of the barge and put the burden of explanation on the tug. The Ellen McGovern (D. C.) 27 Fed. 869; The Resolute (D. C.) 149 Fed. 1005, affirmed 160 Fed. 659, 88 C. C. A. 17. But the finding of the District Judge as to the facts amounts to an explanation which frees the tug of fault, and therefore the decree is affirmed, with costs.

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

WARD, Circuit Judge.

The barge Serviss, while in tow on the port side of the tug R. B. Little, bound from Fifty-Eighth street, North River, to Kingsbridge, Harlem River, was run upon a rock and sunk. This happened in broad daylight in waters constant[207]*207ly used with safety by vessels drawing as much as the Serviss. The District Judge dismissed the libel.

The record is most unsatisfactory. The pleadings of both parties are concededly untrue as to the place of the accident and in other material allegations. The witnesses are inaccurate, entirely unacquainted with charts and in unusual disagreement. The master of the tug is especially blameworthy for failure to report the accident to the steamboat inspectors, as he was bound by law to do. Inspectors’ Rule V (23).

The facts stated make out a prima facie case in favor of the barge and put the burden of explanation on the tug. The Ellen McGovern (D. C.) 27 Fed. 869; The Resolute (D. C.) 149 Fed. 1005, affirmed 160 Fed. 659, 88 C. C. A. 17. But the finding of the District Judge as to the facts amounts to an explanation which frees the tug of fault, and therefore the decree is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 F. 205, 110 C.C.A. 246, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-r-b-little-ca2-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack