(DOWNLOAD) "General Motors Corp. v. Moore-Mccormack Lines Inc." by United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: General Motors Corp. v. Moore-Mccormack Lines Inc.
- Author : United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- Release Date : January 17, 1971
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 69 KB
Description
General Motors brought this action in admiralty against Moore-McCormack Lines, owner of the SS MORMACOAK, for damages suffered when an electric generator, one component of a General Motors power plant being shipped from New York to Brazil, was dropped into harbor waters during discharge from the ship. Pursuant to the relevant provisions of the United States Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), 46 U.S.C. § 1300 et seq., the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Dudley B. Bonsal, Judge), awarded General Motors (GM) $500 for the damage. The opinion is reported at 327 F. Supp. 666 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). GM claims that the district court erred in failing to assess $60,000 damages against Moore-McCormack. We affirm the judgment of the district court. The tariff in effect when the power plant was loaded on board the SS MORMACOAK in June 1964 reflected a freight charge of $24,750 per power plant, plus surcharges of $8.00 per weight measurement ton for use of the Brazilian ports. The bill of lading described the cargo as ""3 pieces -- One Power Plant, consisting of (2) Generator units [and] (1) Control unit."" Section 6 of the bill of lading incorporated the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act into the contract,1 and section 13 was a limitation of liability provisions similar to the COGSA provision, 46 U.S.C. § 1304 (5).2 Under the terms of that provision, the owner of cargo is entitled to recover $500 for each damaged ""package or * * * customary freight unit."" The district court found that the generator was not a package, but that an entire power plant was the customary freight unit for the transaction. Neither party appeals from the decision on the ""package"" issue, but GM claims that the court erred in refusing to hold that the standard weight measurement ton was the freight unit.