When the contract declared on was broken by the master of the Abbie M. Deering, it was the duty of libelants to use reasonable diligence to obtain other employment of a similar character, and thus to reduce the damages arising from the breach of such contract. Schroeder v. Trading Co. (D. C.) 95 Fed. 296; Costigan v. Railroad Co., 2 Denio, 609; Utter v. Chapman, 38 Cal. 659; Howard v. Daly, 61 N. Y. 362. The evidence shows beyond all doubt that all of the libelants,, if they had so- desired, could have obtained such employment upon the schooner Uranus, and, with the exception of libelants Skinning and Hansen, upon the same terms upon which they had been- employed upon the Abbie M. Deering. The two last named' were offered employment, but at a less compensation than they were to receive under the contract set out in the libel; and they are entitled to recover as damages the difference between the sum offered them to go upon the Uranus and that which was agreed to be paid to- them by the terms of that contract. This difference I find in the case of John Skinning to be $25, and in that of Louis Hansen $12.50. Let a decree be entered in favor of libelant John Skinning for the sum of $25, and in favor of Louis Hansen for the sum of $12.50, — said libelants to recover costs; and the libel will, as to all other libelants, be dismissed.
The Abbie M. Deering
105 F. 400
N.D. Cal.1900Check TreatmentAI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.