US V. CARROLL TOWING case brief

US V. CARROLL TOWING

• Carroll tugboat tugging Anna C (owned by Connors), lines break, Anna C is pierced, and sinks

• The Anna C’s bargee was not on the boat at the time

• The bargee lied in court, saying that he was on the boat (he knows he should have been there)

• In this part of the case, Connors was trying to recover the value of its barge from Carrol Towing Co.

Learned Hand formula: BPL

• it was reasonable for the bargee not to have prevented the collision

• but after the collision, the bargee had the duty to call for help and try to save the Anna C

• trial court took flat position saying that it is not negligent for bargees to leave barges

• Hand said Connors Company should have had a bargee aboard during the daylight hours because there was so much activity going on in New York harbor

• Hand is saying that there is no blanket rule for the conduct of bargees on their boats

• Algebraic articulation of facts and circumstances analysis should be used

• P= busy harbor, working hours

• US Court of Appeals affirms trial court ruling – bargee should have been aboard the Anna C during the working hours (this is all that the court held) – this is not an expensive cost-preventative measure