Meyer

Xanadu Maritime Trust v. Meyer

Good Law
21 F. Supp. 2d 1104·99 Daily Journal DAR 2933·1998 WL 725238·1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16262
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 13, 1998C-94-0528 WWS-MMCCalifornia3,006 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schwarzer, J.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This is a Petition in Limitation brought by petitioners XANADU Maritime Trust and Phil Graf against claimant Herbert Meyer, plaintiff in the underlying personal injury action. The parties stipulated to have liability adjudicated in this action. The case went to trial before the court on September 28 and concluded on October 2,1998. Following the presentation of evidence, closing arguments by counsel were heard by the court. These • are the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.

BARIENT’S RULE 52(c) MOTION

The court has heretofore granted Barient’s motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Rule 52(c), made at the close of claimant’s case. Meyer claims that the Barient 28 winch installed on XANADU was defectively designed. He contends that the design defect permitted the winch to be assembled with one or both of its ratchet gears inverted, and that in that condition, which could not be detected from the 'winch’s external appearance, the pawls may not engage the ratchet properly, permitting the ratchet to slip and the winch to fail unexpectedly.

There is no evidence that at the time of the accident on July 31, 1993, one…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.