that the superintendent was aware of the exigency and his share of the responsibility in stowing the cargo. We believe he exercised his best judgment based upon long experience and knowledge of rigging and loading procedures. If his judgment of the capacity of the rigging, based upon the explanation which he has given, were in fact faulty, it does not follow that the error constituted negligence for which his employer became liable. The fact remains that the defective link was the direct cause of the fall, and that there was no negligence on the part of either the crew or the stevedores.
The damages to be awarded to the Libellant must be in such amount as may reasonably be expected to compensate him for present losses, for pain and suffering, and for probable future suffering and loss of earnings. The mathematical calculations urged by the Libellant, based upon present rates of pay and hours, and the Libellant's expectancy, do not fully take into account all of the probabilities with respect to the Libellant's future. He is presently somewhat limited in performing the work of his trade and quite probably will be unable to do the heavier carpentry work over the prolonged hours of labor now prevailing; this may be due both to his injury and to his advancing years. It may be reasonably anticipated, however, that he will obtain acceptable employment in the lighter work of his trade or in another vocation or industry to which he can devote his full time, and that his financial loss will not be as great as he now anticipates. Taking into consideration all of the elements entering into a determination of damages, we believe that $ 7,000 represents a fair and reasonable compensation for the Libellant's pain and suffering, his loss of earning up to this time, and his probable future suffering and financial loss.
Conclusions of Law
1. The Libellant is a workman engaged in a maritime occupation, to whom the owners of the vessel became liable for injuries resulting from the unseaworthiness of the loading gear.
2. The S.S. William Aspinwall was, on April 14, 1944, unseaworthy with respect to the swivel link on the cargo pendant hook, which was a component part of the loading gear of Number 5 hatch.
3. The Second Mate of the vessel was not negligent in failing to observe and prevent the stevedores from overloading the gear of Number 5 hatch, beyond its safe carrying capacity of 5 tons.
4. The Respondent, Atlantic and Gulf Stevedores, Inc., was not negligent in causing the loading gear including the swivel on the cargo hook at Number 5 hatch to be overloaded beyond its safe capacity.
5. The unseaworthiness of the vessel was the proximate cause of the Libellant's injuries and damages.
6. The Libellant was without fault and was not guilty of contributory negligence.
7. The Libellant is entitled to recover $ 7,000 and judgment may be entered accordingly.
The Libellant's request for findings of fact are approved with the exception of numbers, 5, 8, 12, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 32, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40 and 41, and his request for conclusions of law are approved with the exceptions of numbers 4 & 5.
The requests of the Third-Party Respondent, numbers 2, 4, 5, and 6, are approved and numbers 1 and 3 are denied.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.