Sinclair Refining Co. v. The Morania Dolphin

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Sinclair Refining Co. v. The Morania Dolphin, 272 F.2d 192 (2d Cir. 1959)

Sinclair Refining Co. v. The Morania Dolphin

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We find it unnecessary to supplement what is said in Judge Weinfeld’s excellent opinion on the subject of the fault of the Thirtle. We affirm the decree against the Dolphin on the ground of her statutory fault in passing the Thirtle despite the fact that she received no response to her signal for permission to pass. We agree with Judge Weinfeld that the Dolphin has not sustained the heavy burden of proving that this statutory violation “could not have contributed to the occurrence.” The Pennsylvania, 1873, 86 U.S. 125, 136, 22 L.Ed. 148; Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. The Santiago, 2 Cir., 1946, 155 F.2d 148, 150, note 7.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY, as charterer in possession of THE P. W. THIRTLE and as assignee of Bethlehem Steel Company, Libellant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. THE MORANIA DOLPHIN, Dolphin Transportation Co. and Morania Oil Tanker Corporation, Claimants-Respondents-Appellants-Cross-Appellees, and THE DALZELLEADER and EDNA M. MATTON, Dalzelleader, Inc., Dalzell Towing Company, Inc., and Matton Steamboat Co., Inc., Claimants-Respondents-Impleaded
Cited By
6 cases
Status
Published