Document: 349 U.S. 129 75 S.Ct. 654 99 L.Ed. 939 UNITED STATES of America, as Owner THE S. CHRISTOPHER GALE, Petitioner,v.Chris NIELSON et al., Co-Partners Trading Under the Firm Name and Style ofDauntless Towing Line, Tug DAUNTLESS NO. 6. No. 210. Argued March 1, 1955. Decided May 16, Mr. Ralph Spritzer, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Anthony V. Lynch, New York City, respondent. Justice BLACK delivered opinion Court. 1 The respondent, Dauntless contracted to use two its tugs in assisting United States, petitioner here, move steamship Christopher Gale from Hoboken a Brooklyn pier. was under own propelling power guidance one respondent's tugboat captains or some other licensed pilot. contract further provided that captain pilot going on board would become 'servant owners vessel assisted respect giving orders any furnished engaged service handling such vessel, neither those furnishing and/or nor tugs, their owners, agents, charterers shall be liable damage resulting therefrom.' One tug went aboard government it connection with moving operation. respondent were at time fastened by lines help guide movements. crushed between pier while attempting carry out maneuver piloting Gale. 2 brought this suit admiralty recover damages States alleging caused negligent pilotage temporarily acting 'servant' After hearings District Court found pilot's negligence 'in persisting his attempt enter slip after he knew should have known could not overcome force wind tide keep sagging down Pier 1.' On finding entered decree requiring pay about negligence. This over Government's contention invalid if construed exempting liability servant's 112 F.Supp. 730. Agreeing Court's reasoning decree, Appeals affirmed. Cir., 209 F.2d 958. We granted certiorari consider meaning validity clause, 348 811, 59, same cases, today decided, which involve contracts towers towage. Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp., 85, 629; Boston Metals Co. Winding Gulf, 122, 649. 3 Sun Oil Dalzell Co., 287 291, 53 135, 77 311, involved substantially here. Dalzell's negligently piloted Oil's causing boat ground suffer damages. sued Dalzell. pleaded defense. held company validly against being 'liable damage' there having effect. question case, however, is whether agreement ship release resulting' only relieves damage, but allows affirmatively collect injury due captains. 4 An third person cannot easily read an entitled person. And no reason stretch contractual language payment circumstances like these. A supplying employees another common undertaking usually because work employee supplied. Clear might justify imposition liability. But here does meet test we do construe authorizing 5 Reversed. 6 HARLAN took part consideration decision case. 7 BURTON, whom REED joins, dissenting. 8 clause agreed parties herein states that— 9 'When making her goes said understood becomes servant * *.' (Italics supplied.) 10 According above agreement, make captain, serving capacity, servant. Recognizing I give full effect expressed purpose. Accordingly, affirm judgment Appeals.

Category: 7