Friday, March 23, 2012
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
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...