873 F.3d 177
2d Cir.2017Background
- On April 30, 2011, Charis Tagle was a passenger aboard the sightseeing sailing vessel Shearwater and was seated near the forestaysail mast at the bow.
- Crewman Christopher Biggins detached a halyard (a rope with a one‑pound stainless steel pelican clip) from the forestaysail; the freed halyard swung and the clip struck Tagle, cutting her forehead.
- Biggins could not recall why he lost hold of the halyard; the captain’s log and testimony recorded that the line “slipped out of his hands.”
- Tagle sued in state court for negligence; the shipowners invoked the Limitation of Liability Act and sought exoneration in federal admiralty court. The district court held a bench trial and found no negligence, denying res ipsa loquitur relief.
- On appeal, the Second Circuit vacated, holding Tagle made a prima facie showing of negligence and entitlement to res ipsa loquitur (or proved negligence independent of res ipsa), and remanded for a finding of negligence and further proceedings to determine owner privity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of res ipsa loquitur | Tagle: the halyard swinging and striking her is the sort of event that ordinarily does not occur absent negligence; inference of negligence warranted | Owners: sailors routinely lose control of lines due to wind/wake; event can occur without negligence, so res ipsa inapplicable | Court: district court misapplied test; res ipsa may apply when event ordinarily does not occur absent negligence — Tagle made prima facie showing and owners failed to rebut |
| Negligence (duty, breach, causation) | Tagle: crew owed duty to secure weighted halyard; failure to do so breached duty and proximately caused injury | Owners: loss of control can happen non‑negligently (e.g., waves/wind); no proof of breach | Court: evidence supports inference Biggins failed to exercise required skill and care; negligence established independent of res ipsa |
| Limitation of liability — privity/knowledge | N/A (Tagle seeks recovery; establishing negligence defeats exoneration unless owners lacked privity/knowledge) | Owners: sought exoneration or limitation under Limitation Act; district court did not reach privity after finding no negligence | Court: negligence established; remanded to district court to decide privity/knowledge under Limitation Act |
Key Cases Cited
- Sojak v. Hudson Waterways Corp., 590 F.2d 53 (2d Cir.) (sets elements of res ipsa loquitur in admiralty)
- Savard v. Marine Contracting Inc., 471 F.2d 536 (2d Cir.) (res ipsa elements and application)
- Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 46 (Supreme Court) (res ipsa applied where an object falling from above ordinarily does not occur absent negligence)
- Irwin v. United States, 236 F.2d 774 (2d Cir.) (distinguishes accidents caused by unpredictable sea conditions where defendant lacked control of cause)
- Otal Invs. Ltd. v. M.V. Clary, 494 F.3d 40 (2d Cir.) (discusses fault allocation in maritime collisions; cited for inference principles)
- Pasternack v. Lab. Corp. of America Holdings, 807 F.3d 14 (2d Cir.) (elements of negligence in this circuit)
- Barlow v. Liberty Mar. Corp., 746 F.3d 518 (2d Cir.) (standard of care for seamen: reasonably prudent seaman)