Case Name: THE CITY OF OAKLAND
Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1922-01-13
Citations: 277 F. 969
Docket Number: No. 17234
Parties: THE CITY OF OAKLAND.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 277
Pages: 969–969

Head Matter:
THE CITY OF OAKLAND.
(District Court, N. D. California, First Division.
January 13, 1922.)
No. 17234.
1. Shipping ©=>81 (I)—Dredge held liable for cutting caMe.
Where either a dredge or a cable cut by it was out of its proper place, but the cable was practically stationary, with a possible swing of 50 feet, while the dredge was moving, the dredge held liable, as it is more likely that it was out of place than that the cable was.
2. Admiralty ©=26—Decree in rein entered against dredge for cutting cable.
In a suit against a dredge l'or cutting a cable, decree in rem entered for the libelant, in order that the question whether the action in rem was maintainable might be determined.
In Admiralty. Libel by the Postal Telegraph-Cable Company against the dredge City of Oakland, etc., and another.
Decree for libelant.
Willard P. Smith and William B. Acton, both of San Francisco, Cal., for libelant.
Leon E. Gray, City Atty., and John Jewett Earle, Deputy City Atty., both of Oakland, Cal., for respondents.

Opinion:
DOOLTXG, District Judge.
Respondent was warned that its dredg-e was operating in the neighborhood of libelant's cable and was likely to cut it. The warning was apparently unheeded. Either the dredge or the cable was out of its proper place. The cable was practically stationary, with a possible swing of SO feet. The dredge was moving. It is more likely that the dredge was out of place than that the cable was.
A decree will therefore be entered for libelant. I am not sure that the action in rem may be maintained, but a decree in rem will be entered, so that the matter may be determined for the guidance of all of us.