the mast and the winch operators on the elevated platform had to duck for safety. Both the port and starboard shackles' bodies and pins were severely distorted in the process. During this moment or moments fatal injuries were inflicted upon the libellant's decedent, Albert Mascuilli, who was working on the deck as a tag line tender.
I. The vangs were leading upward at the time of the parting of the shackle. With the vangs leading upward, lowering of the tank would tend to slack off all the vangs. However, the after starboard vang was being heaved in at a greater rate of speed than the other vangs were being payed-out. The tension on the vangs created by this unsafe and unorthodox procedure could not have prevented a tightline effect. The tightline effect that existed between the after port vang and the starboard vang, and the heaving-in of the after starboard vang, could have been increased greatly by a momentary stopping of the lowering of the tank and a raising of the boom itself to a more advantageous position in the after quadrant of the hatch.
J. The directions of the signalman were not followed or were improper. It is obvious that no winch operator can predict the intentions or movements of the other two winch operators, and the coordination of all three winchmen is absolutely necessary for a proper and prudent movement of the boom in order to prevent tightlining or allowing the winches to oppose one another and to become tightlined. It is absolutely essential that all longshoremen act as a sole entity to insure the success of these operations. In this case, there was a failure by the longshoremen to cooperate and comply with the proper procedures.
K. Mr. Moore, the Third Officer, was attentive throughout the entire loading procedure and was unable to prevent the tightline condition since it occurred suddenly and without warning. There was no time to issue any warnings or instructions to any of the winch operators or the signalman.
35. In summary, the Court finds that the vessel and all of its equipment was in a seaworthy condition at all times, and remained so throughout the entire loading operations. The accident was caused solely by the negligent operation of the stevedoring crew using seaworthy equipment in such a manner as to cause the accident to occur so instantaneously that the Third Officer was unable to warn anyone or prevent its happening.
36. In the event that this Court would have found for the libellant, it would have assessed the damages in libellant's favor as follows:
A. All counsel stipulated that no testimony as to damages would be offered; in lieu thereof, a transcript of all the testimony and exhibits presented at the trial conducted in March of 1961 as to the issue of damages was made a part of the record in this trial. B. The Court has studied diligently these 187 pages of testimony, and has considered carefully the arguments of counsel and the amounts of damages contended for by them. C. At the time of his death on May 1, 1959, libellant's decedent was approximately forty-four years and nine months old. From the testimony of the actuary, the decedent had an overall life expectancy of twenty-nine years, and a worklife expectancy of twenty years. D. The Pennsylvania Wrongful Death Act is controlling as to the calculation of damages, and all monetary losses must be certain and ascertainable. E. It has been stipulated by counsel that there was no pain or suffering since the death was described by the attending physician as being instantaneous. F. The damages must be computed according to law, and the interest in reference to present worth must be computed at the lawful rate of six percent. The present worth value of $ 1.00 per year payable at the end of 20 years at 6% Is equivalent to 11.470. G. The libel, as filed by decedent's libellant, makes no claim as to a monetary loss of inheritance for each surviving child. H. Libellant has not sustained any monetary loss from the property investments which were owned by the estate of the deceased. I. The pecuniary loss of income to decedent's estate is estimated at $ 60,438.30, and is calculated as follows:
1956 Tax Return $ 6,217.00
1957 Tax Return 6,227.15
1958 Tax Return 5,035.05
1959 Projected Earnings (Tax return
to May 1, 1959 shows $ 3,091.00
Total Income 1956-1959 ... $ 23,706.35
Average Income 1956-1959 ... $ 5,926.59
10% Permitted for Future Increases $ 592.66
Average Future Income... $ 6,519.25
Less Living Expenses $ 1,250.00
(Present worth value of $ 1.00 per year
payable at end of 30 years at 6%
11.47 X $ 5,269.25 equals ... $ 60,438.30
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.