Overview
Case summary
This admiralty case involves a suit in rem against the steam schooner G. C. Lindauer for damages arising from a maritime tort. On March 29, 1907, the Lindauer, moored in a slip in Bellingham Bay, stretched an unlit hawser across the slip to prevent chafing. The steam tug Carlyle, entering the slip after dark to reach her usual berth, struck the hawser, breaking her mast and seriously injuring her captain. The captain suffered a fractured jaw, lost teeth, permanent disfigurement, and impaired ability to eat. The District Court held the Lindauer liable as the hawser was an unlawful obstruction to navigation, and the ship, as a guilty thing, was subject to a lien for damages. The court rejected claims of contributory negligence against the tug for failing to signal, finding it did not contribute to the accident. Damages were awarded: $100 to the tug owner for property damage and $4,500 to the captain for personal injuries, including compensation for lost wages, pain, expenses, and permanent effects.
Abstract
A steam schooner moored in a slip stretched an unlit hawser across it, which a steam tug struck after dark, causing property damage to the tug and severe personal injuries to its captain including a fractured jaw, lost teeth, disfigurement, and impaired eating ability. The court held the schooner liable in rem as the hawser was an unlawful obstruction to navigation, rejected contributory negligence claims against the tug, and awarded damages to the tug owner for property damage and to the captain for injuries, lost wages, pain, expenses, and permanent effects. The decree affirmed liability with awards plus interest and costs.
Opinion of the court
opinionHANFORD, District Judge
- Hawser was unlawful obstruction to navigation
- Lindauer liable in rem as guilty thing
- Tug's failure to signal not contributory negligence
- Damages reasonably assessed based on evidence
Jurisdiction
not challenged- Suit in rem for damages in admiralty arising from maritime tort
Procedural posture
- Liability for unlawful obstruction of navigation
- Damages for personal injury and property damage
Legal categories
Case record
Issues & holdings
Not applicable (trial court findings)
Hawser was unlawful obstruction; Lindauer as guilty thing liable for consequential damages
Issue preserved for review
Not applicable (trial court findings)
Failure did not contribute to casualty as no one on Lindauer could have removed hawser or given warning
Issue preserved for review
Not applicable (trial court findings)
Court assessed reasonable damages based on evidence: $100 for tug, $4,500 for captain
Issue preserved for review
Holdings of the court
Burden of proof
Timeline
Steam schooner G. C. Lindauer arrives at Bellingham, moored obliquely in slip with hawser stretched across to Sehome dock, left unlit at night
Created unlawful obstruction leading to accident
Steam tug Carlyle enters slip after dark, strikes unlit hawser, breaking mast and injuring captain
Outcome: Tug damaged, captain seriously injured
Direct cause of damages claimed
District Court enters decree for libelants, awarding damages
Outcome: Decree for libelants
Final disposition of case
Facts & evidence
Incident
Key facts
6 facts- Steam schooner G. C. Lindauer moored obliquely in slip with bow against wharf and stern overlapping schooner A. M. Baxter
- Lindauer stretched a hawser across slip to Sehome dock to prevent chafing, left unmarked by lights at night
- Steam tug Carlyle entered slip after dark to reach her usual berth, struck hawser, breaking mast and injuring captain
- Captain suffered fractured jaw, lost teeth, bruises, permanent disfigurement, and impaired ability to masticate food
- Tug owner paid monthly rental for berth at Sehome dock
- Man in charge of Sehome dock warned Lindauer crew about improper obstruction, but warning was ignored
Disputed questions
- Whether tug's failure to signal approach constituted contributory negligence
Procedural history
2 steps- Two libels filed: one by captain for personal injuries, one by owner for damages to tug
- Trial in admiralty before District Court
Evidence in the record
- Testimony about hawser stretched across slip
- Testimony about tug striking hawser
- Medical evidence of captain's injuries
- Broken mast of tug
- Hawser cut to release tug
- Testimony of captain and owner of tug
- Testimony of man in charge of Sehome dock
- Testimony of Lindauer crew
- Warning from Sehome dock man ignored
- Darkness preventing visibility of hawser
- Evidence type: Failure to signal approach · Challenge basis: contributory negligence · Trial court ruling: admitted · Reasoning: Court found it did not contribute to casualty · Challenged on appeal: false · Appellate outcome: not applicable
Objects of relevance
Policy considerations
- Promotion of safe navigation in maritime contexts
- Protection of vessels from unlawful obstructions
Authorities
Cited authorities (1)
Related cases (1)
Standards & doctrines
- Guilty thing doctrine for in rem liability in admiralty
- Maritime law principle on contributory fault
Legal principles applied
- Fault not contributing to injury does not reduce damages in maritime law
- Vessel as guilty thing liable for consequential damages
Notable quotes
“It is the opinion of the court that the hawser was an unlawful obstruction of navigation; and, it being a part of the equipment of the ship, she is to be regarded as a guilty thing, and perpetrator of a wrong, and subject to a lien for the consequential damages.”majority — Court's finding on liabilityEstablishes basis for in rem liability in maritime tort
“In maritime law a fault which does not contribute to the production of an injury is not ground for a division of damages.”majority — Rejecting contributory negligence claimApplies maritime principle to bar reduction of damages