United States v. Carroll Towing Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947 · Torts

TortsnegligenceHand formulabreachreasonable carenegligencereasonable carebreach

Facts

The Anna C, a barge owned by Conners and chartered to the Pennsylvania Railroad, was moored off a pier with other barges outside her. A tug operated for the Grace Line and owned by Carroll Towing sent its deckhand and Grace Line harbormaster to inspect and readjust the moorings before casting off a line between tiers of barges; shortly after, the Anna C's tier broke adrift, and the Anna C struck a tanker whose propeller holed her. The bargee had been absent since the prior evening, so no one was aboard to discover the leak, call for help, or use available tug assistance that could have kept the barge afloat and saved the cargo. The court treated the initial breakaway and collision separately from the later sinking losses caused by the unattended leak.

Issue

Whether Grace Line was liable for the negligence of its harbormaster in approving the Anna C's fasts, and whether Conners was contributorily at fault because the bargee was absent when the damaged barge began to sink. More broadly, the court had to decide when failure to keep a bargee aboard constitutes a lack of reasonable care.

Rule

There is no general rule requiring or excusing a bargee's presence at all times; negligence depends on the circumstances. The owner's duty to take precautions against a vessel's breaking away is a function of three variables: the probability of the event (P), the gravity of the resulting injury (L), and the burden of adequate precautions (B). Liability depends on whether B is less than PL. In the circumstances of this case, it was a fair requirement that the barge owner keep a bargee aboard during daylight working hours unless he had some excuse for his absence.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a busy commercial pier in Baltimore, Harbor Crest Logistics left its unmanned supply barge tied up from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. while other vessels were repeatedly shifted in and out nearby. A minor impact at noon opened a slow leak, and a tug with pumps was tied up 200 feet away, but no one noticed until the barge sank and damaged its own cargo.

Under the majority's approach, what is the strongest argument that Harbor Crest was negligent?

Explanation. The majority rejects any categorical rule and frames negligence as a function of burden (B), probability (P), and gravity of loss (L). In a crowded harbor during working daylight hours, where vessels are frequently shifted and harm from breakaway or collision can be substantial, reasonable care may require an attendant if B is less than PL. The opinion specifically rejects a universal rule and treats custom as unresolved in some contexts, not dispositive here.