Opinion ID: 19793
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Management Decision - Skylight and Vent Covers

Text: 24 Folger Coffee and Gulf Insurance contend that the conditions of the skylight, or hatch, and vent covers and the fact that these items were not customarily closed made the vessel unseaworthy. The district court found that the most likely explanation for the entry of water into the alternator room was through the hatch and the exhaust vents and that the vessel was relieved of liability because the decision not to close the skylight or the vent covers was a management decision. The district court further found that these items, though not in ideal condition, functioned properly since, once closed and fastened, they did not let any more water inside. 25 COGSA excepts the carrier for liability from damage caused by '[a]ct, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot, or the servants of the carrier in the navigation or in the management of the ship.' Usinas Siderugicas de Minas Geras, SA-Usiminas v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co., Ltd, 118 F.3d 328, 333 (5th Cir. 1997) (quoting 46 U.S.C. 1304(2)(a)). Failure to detect a flaw prior to sailing constitutes a failure to exercise due diligence and not an error of management. See id. at 332. There is a fine line between actions that constitute errors in management and inaction that constitutes a lack of due diligence. Id. 26 Folger Coffee and Gulf Insurance argue that the failure to close the skylight and vents could not have been a management decision because it was not an act but an omission. Folger Coffee and Gulf Insurance have misconstrued the district court's use of the phrase management decision. Neglect by management also relieves liability under COGSA. 4 See 46 U.S.C. 1304(2)(a). 27 The district court's finding that the vessel was not rendered unseaworthy due to the state or condition of the skylight andvent covers was not clear error and is supported by the record.