The Transfer No. 8
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in admiralty for collision by the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company, owner of steam tug No. 25, against the Transfer No. 8, the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, claimant, with cross-libel against tug No. 25. Decree against tug No. 25, and her claimant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in admiralty for collision by the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company, owner of steam tug No. 25, against the Transfer No. 8, the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, claimant, with cross-libel against tug No. 25. Decree against tug No. 25, and her claimant appeals. These causes come here upon appeals from decrees of the District Court of New York which held tug No. 25 solely to blame for a collision between herself and Transfer No. 8. In the early morning, before…
1Per curiam
The appellant contends that No. 8 was at fault in failing to stop her sternway in time to avoid collision. Whether she could have done so depends naturally on the speed she had reached when she first saw No. 25. All difficulties and inconsistencies in the testimony, which are urged in argument, are explained by the' fact that No'. 8 was much further in the slip than the 50 feet her master estimated he-was from the end of the pier. The slip is 330 feet long. He tied his lighter close up to the bulkhead, and lay himself bow inshore just a little out from the lighter. As No. 8 was 103 feet long,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Edward J. Barton Lighterage Co. v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924