Document: 409 U.S. 140 93 S.Ct. 368. 34 L.Ed.2d 365 UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioner,v.THE SAN JACINTO et al. No. 71-900. Argued Oct. 17, 1972. Decided Dec. 5, Syllabus Implicit in that portion of Art. 16 the Inland Rules Navigation directs a moderate speed for vessels proceeding foggy weather, and concomitant half-distance rule, is assumption can reasonably be expected to traveling on intersecting courses. On facts this case, it was totally unrealistic anticipate possibility were courses rule not applicable. Pp. 144—146. 451 F.2d 1369, reversed. Kenneth E. Roberts, Portland, Or., petitioner. Erskine B. Wood, respondents. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 While up Columbia River, oil tanker S.S. Santa Maria, bareboat chartered by petitioner, struck barge owned respondent Oliver J. Olson & Co. The being towed tugboat San Jacinto, Star Crescent Towboat Both damaged. Petitioner commenced admiralty action damages cross-libeled barge. District Court found collision resulted solely from negligence part crew dismissed cross-libel. 304 F.Supp. 519 (Or.1969). Ninth Circuit affirmed finding Jacinto had been negligent, but determined Maria also negligent violating 'half-distance' 30 Stat. 99, 33 U.S.C. § 192. That court therefore reversed with directions determine amount damage sustained assess under divided-damages rule. See Schooner Catharine v. Dickinson, 17 How. 170, 15 L.Ed. 233 (1855). We granted certiorari, 405 954, 92 1177, 31 230 (1972), principally consider petitioner's request we abandon orderly disposition issues presented petition however, requires address ourselves issue liability before reaching question damages. Since so doing conclude Appeals wrong holding liable at all, do reach 2 * evening December 24, 1967, loaded 17,000 tons petroleum products, River toward Portland. ship steaming Oregon side channel, clear visibility. At same time, downriver, towing 275-foot barge, fully lumber, 250-foot towline. Proceeding Washington encountered weather conditions upriver. As approached Cooper Point, upstream, sighted tug both visually radar. two more than mile apart opposite sides 500-foot-wide shipping channel. There heavy fog, described as 'tule fog,' around fog localized Although there haze drizzle, no channel; visibility bridge upstream between one one-half miles. 3 entered off lost visual contact Maria's pilot did track radar, believing would remain channel knowing ample room port-to-port passage. half-speed making approximately seven knots. 4 watch when Point. tug's captain testified that, after entering he cut three or knots, dead ahead 50 yards. Jacinto's navigators 'navigating sight coast,' estimated passed 75 yards point, heard blast ship's horn (later discovered have Maria), responded signal tow. No sighting made, however. Shortly thereafter, range lights, which, testified, thought 20 degrees his starboard bow. To avoid what anticipated momentary collision, swung port—towards channel—and executed U-turn, hoping run upriver thus collision. 5 started U-turn while still execution turn brought course directly across Maria. emerging right angles distance 900 feet. Full astern immediately ordered. quickly completing turn, headed safely Before could completely stop, tow sideslipped crashing into port bow Maria; force blow drove aground. 6 those charge navigation, eight respects, including navigating excessive speed, failing maintain proper lookout, 'acting hastily without sufficient cause pulling adequate clearance pass port.' 'the proximately caused sole fault negligence' acts allegedly committed 'proximately (contribute) resulting damage.' F.Supp., 521, 522. 7 partially reversed, an immoderate knots 'while approaching edge bank.' reasoned only feet emerged bank, such she stop within half distance. court, relying Silver Palm, 94 754 (CA9), cert. denied sub nom. United States Line, Ltd., 576, 58 1046, 82 1539 (1937), deemed immaterial direction which headed—was almost miles, because its view 'relevant distance' calculating bank—to santa maria. Finding statutory fault, ruling petitioner failed prove possibly contributed see Pennsylvania, 19 Wall. 125, 22 148 (1874), held total II 8 turns application Navigation, Rule provides pertinent part: 9 'Every vessel shall, mist, falling snow, rainstorms, go having careful regard existing circumstances conditions.' (Emphasis added.) 10 test determining should proceed phrased general terms, our decisions attached well-recognized gloss phrase. This variously referred 'rule slight,' 'a speed' 11 'rate enable (the vessel) come standstill, reversing her engines full collide through fog.' Nacoochee, 137 330, 339, 122, 687 (1890). 12 Colorado, 91 692, 702, 23 379 (1876); Umbria, 166 404, 417, 610, 615, 41 1053 (1897). stated Chattahoochee, 173 540, 548, 491, 494, 43 801 (1899), '(t) principal reason reduction will give (both) time coming each other.' If vessels, upon other, are rates reaches point intersect, impossible. 13 quarrel salutary purpose thumb.' It premised notion waters other ships might courses, must separating they first other. If, travel particular heading intersect another ship, rather clearly present. 14 Those cases has upheld violation involved established coastal lanes. City New York, 147 72, 211, 37 84 (1893); supra; cf. supra (Lake Huron), near harbor, Ludvig Holberg, 157 60, 477, 39 620 (1895) (no fault). imply running opposed it, required relation cover. was, indeed, circumstance supra, relied. But naval cruiser traveling, banks side, busy lane Francisco Los Angeles. reasonable expect steam out to, with, vessel. applicable precisely event occur. case significantly different. well-defined relatively narrow last ahead, along coast. navigation cannot faulted anticipating unorthodox maneuver darting Victory Plymothian, 168 410, 18 149, 42 1897). evidence record suggesting prevented complete halt either remotely foreseeable else overtaken her. bank reasons seaman could, circumstances, anticipated. Court's any collision' way saying based some relationship dangers against designed protect. Here not. believe Court, Appeals, reached correct result liability. respondents alone occasion how apportioned fault. Reversed. STEWART, whom DOUGLAS BRENNAN join, dissenting. misty Christmas Eve tanker—the Marie—was moving River. forward tanker's tug, downstream ahead. heavily laden tow, disappeared patch fog. inexperienced became disoriented mistakenly veered believed master sharp leftward path oncoming tanker. successfully completed smashed tanker, damaging left driving 21 In complaint cross-complaint owners sued, charging blame. entirely tug—in unreasonable sound signals, ascertain risk danger signal, reduce take evasive action, keep control, turning 519. rate excess allowed her, modified judgment 1369. Though 'more flagrant shocking,' id., 1374, damages, since unable collision.1 I reaffirm continued vitality approve case. concur decision, apparently approving 'salutary purpose' guts certainty elusive concepts bearing bank. short, today allows provided does agree. rational interpretation command shall 'moderate 'careful simply require able visibility, 'to 687.2 scholar rule: collide.' Griffin, American Law Collision 295 (1949). 24 Marie knew over nevertheless steamed When cutting course, separated vessels. 450 feet.3 Indeed, turned back covered considerably initially 25 agree correctly applies Not narrow, traveled actually bow; become emerge course. And surely apply head-on collisions. Cir., 754. Moreover, here less tangentially altered head course—which quite possible 500 wide point—the closing if followed orthodox mean oblivious vessel's path. 26 Concepts 'reasonable expectancy,' 'anticipated possibility,' little service '(T)he genius Prevention their certainty.' Hess Shipping Corp. S. Charles Lykes, 417 346, 351 (Brown, J., dissenting). effective measurable thumb, nautical limit. Speed limits serve useful applied probability accident 27 say incorrectly concluded violated certiorari validity question, refrain expressing my views it. 136, 148; O/Y Finlayson-Forssa A/B Pan Atlantic Corp., 259 11, 22. 'The consensus country effect steamer bound use precautions comes sight, herself going law.' 1053. appears assumed much: 'It Article §§ technical nature contributing collision.' 519,

Category: 7