DISTRICT COURT DID NOT CLEARLY ERR IN FINDING THAT OWNER'S TWO BARGES BROKE LOOSE AND DAMAGED SHORE SIDE RESTAURANT, AS TWO WITNESSES TESTIFIED THAT THEY SAW BARGES FLOATING BY AND LATER SAW THEM IN FRONT OF RESTAURANT, AND ACT OF GOD DEFENSE WAS INAPPLIC
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT OF CENAC TOWING COMPANY, INC., vs. SOUTHPORT, L.L.C..
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 11705
May 18, 2007, Filed
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant, a barge owner, sought review of a judgment from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, which, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 52, ruled in favor of appellees, a restaurant and its lessor, in the barge owner's limitation of liability suit to adjudicate all damages allegedly caused by two of the owner's barges.
OVERVIEW: The captain of the barges lashed them side-by-side in a canal for the purpose of riding out a hurricane. The barges were tied to some trees on the shore, but the trees were uprooted during the storm. Appellees alleged that two of the barges ran into the restaurant, causing structural damage. A captain of another ship testified that the two barges were the only large objects he saw floating by during the storm and that he saw two barges blocking the lights in front of the restaurant. The barge owner alleged that another barge, which belonged to someone else, caused the damage. The district court disagreed, crediting the testimony of the captain of the other ship. On appeal, the court held that the district court's findings were not clearly erroneous, given the testimony of the captain of the other ship and similar testimony from another witness aboard that ship. The court also found that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the Act of God defense asserted by the barge owner was inapplicable, as the 84-mile per hour wind speeds during the storm were not of such a force that no reasonable preparations would have prevented the barges from breaking loose.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the district court's judgment.
