Case ID: f-supp_16/html/0626-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "KNOX, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CONNERS MARINE CO. v. NORTHWESTERN FIRE & MARINE INS. CO.
    District Court, S. D. New York.
    May 21, 1936.
    Thomas A. McDonald, of New York City, for Conners Marine Co.
    
      Bigham, Englair, Jones & Houston, of New York City, for Northwestern Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
   KNOX, District Judge.

The motion to dismiss the complaint for its failure to state a cause of action must he sustained. In my opinion, pontoons cannot properly be included in the category either of hulls and barges, or of hulls and cargoes. A pontoon falls within an entirely different designation. Although water borne, it is quite distinct from a hull, barge, or cargo, in both functions and reality. Furthermore, as I read the policy of insurance, it does not cover the loss which came to plaintiff as a result of a towage contract. Towage is not included within the liability of the assured “as owners, managing owners, operatives and/or operating agents, charterers, carriers, warehousemen, stevedores, wharfingers, forwarders, or freighters as imposed by law.” Each of the enumerated capacities is without the inclusiveness of a tow-age contract.