Skip to main content
· 4/6/1904

The Trader

Citations

  • 129 F. 462
  • 1904 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 299

Syllabus

<p>1. Collision — Steam Vessels Meeting — Negligence and Violation of Rules.</p> <p>A collision occurred in Puget Sound shortly after dark, off Dash Point, four miles north of Tacoma, between the steamer Capital City, proceeding from Tacoma at a speed of 12 miles, and the British steamer Trader, coming southward at a speed of 5% miles. The night was dark but calm, with no fog, and the lights could readily be seen. As the Capital City came out past Brown’s Point, being then on a crossing course and showing her green light to the Trader, the latter, then a mile distant, gave a signal of two blasts for passing starboard to starboard, which was not answered. The Capital City then swung to the starboard so as to pass a quarter of a mile off Dash Point, and for five minutes the vessels approached each other head on. When half a mile apart the Trader repeated her signal for a starboard passing, which was assented to, but the Capital City proceeded without changing course or speed until immediately before collision, when, without signal, she ported her helm and swung to starboard across the course of the Trader, which immediately reversed, but too late to avoid the collision. Held, that both vessels were in fault; the Trader for signaling while the other vessel was coming around the point and before she had settled on her course, and persisting in such signal contrary to the rules while they were approaching head on, and for not sooner stopping and giving alarm signals when the Capital City was seen to be coming on at full speed without changing her course; the Capital City for inattention to the meeting vessel, for failing to act on the signal after acceding to it, and, finally, for taking the contrary course without notice, making the collision inevitable. ■</p> <p>2. Same — Issues in Suit — Consolidation of Causes.</p> <p>The failure of a petition for limitation of liability on account of collision to set out the grounds on which exemption from liability is claimed, as r

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that defendants’ allegation that “as 24 a result of her own acts and/or omissions, Plaintiff has waived any right which she may 25 have had to recover . . .” failed to provide fair notice
  • advising that even pre-Kohler, the Southern District || utilized the fair notice standard rather than the 7 womblylIgbal standard when reviewing adequacy of affirmative defenses

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hanford

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.