W. Talbot picked up Crain's Barge C.B. 325 at Huntington, West Virginia.
21. C.B. 325 began to take water immediately after it was moved out of Island Creek Dock at Huntington, West Virginia, and sank below Lock 27 in the Ohio River.
22. The damages suffered by Wieman, by reason of loss of the coal cargo, was $ 3,609.90.
23. Both of said barges were salvaged and repaired.
24. The market value of C.B. 330 on August 17, 1950 was $ 10,000. The cost of repair was $ 8,138.11. Prior to repairs, the scrap market value was $ 2,700. The measure of damages for said barge must be difference in value before and after the sinking, or $ 7,300 since cost of repair was greater than difference in value.
25. Crain suffered additional financial loss of $ 3,969.81 for cost of salvage or removal from navigable waters, and loss of use of said barge in amount of $ 804.
26. The market value of C.B. 325 on August 18, 1950 was $ 10,000. The cost of repairs was $ 400, which is the damages suffered by Crain.
27. Crain suffered additional financial loss of $ 1,962.70 for cost of salvage, or removal from navigable waters, and loss of use of said barge in amount of $ 744.
Conclusions of Law
1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the cause of action in admiralty.
2. Union chartered Crain Barges C.B. 325 and C.B. 330, and same were not chartered by Wieman.
3. The sinking and damage to Crain Barges C.B. 325 and C.B. 330 occurred because the barges were unseaworthy.
4. The sinking and damage to Crain Barges C.B. 325 and C.B. 330 was caused by the negligent handling of these barges by Union.
5. A provision contained in the Union tariff book purporting to release Union from liability for its negligence, but which provision is not contained in any oral or written agreement between Wieman and Union or even contained in the Union bill-of-lading, is ineffective to release Union from liability for its negligence.
6. In connection with Admiralty Action No. 235, Wieman is entitled to recover value of the coal cargo from Union, and Union, in turn, is entitled to recover from Crain by was of contribution.
7. In connection with Admiralty Action No. 192, since no charter argument was in effect between Crain and Wieman, Crain is not entitled to recover from Wieman for damage caused Barges C.B. 325 and C.B. 330.
8. Wieman, being free of liability, is not entitled to recover over from Union.
9. Crain, having furnished unseaworthy barges to Union, is not entitled to recover from Union.
An appropriate Order is entered.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.