Petition of Kinsman Transit Co.

Petition of Kinsman Transit Co. - Petition of Kinsman...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Petition of Kinsman Transit Co. 338 F.2d 708 Fact: Operative Facts: Large grain barge broke loose from her mooring, due to the negligence of her handlers. Barge broke a second vessel loose and the two rammed into a drawbridge, knocking it down. Then it dammed the river, which caused extensive flooding. Issue: the owner of the barge can be liable for the flooding, that caused damage to property. Rule: Rational: Courts held that there is no limit to liability in this case, because the rule isn’t what is foreseeable… at the time of the negligent, just what could have been foreseeable that would happen. Whether the link is strong enough to impose some sort of recovery from the defendant. Holding: Broad: Narrow: Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences: Dissent: stating that he doesn’t like the idea of 20/20 hindsight. Just because it happened, then it was foreseeable. Uses 3 cases to make his point. In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. – While a servant was loading up a ship, he dropped a plank into a
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/20/2011 for the course TORTS 131 taught by Professor Keller during the Fall '11 term at Western State Colorado University .

Ask a homework question - tutors are online