Jensen

Jensen v. Bank Line, Ltd.

Good Law
26 F.2d 173·1928 A.M.C. 1137·1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 3622
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 1928No. 5352California1,472 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

Concerning the. condition of the shaekle pin and the strain under which it broke, all the testimony on behalf of the appellant, with the exception of that of one expert, was heard before the court. There was evidence that the pin had been subjected to extraordinary strain in dragging a heavy slingload of lumber, estimated by the first officer of the ship to weigh 2% tons, a distance of 180 feet across the dock. An expert witness, who had been employed in the repair department of the Emergency Eleet Corporation, testified that in his judgment the pin- was in prime condition prior to what he characterized as the enormous pressure which broke it, that otherwise it would not have distorted the eye of the pin or drawn the jaws of the shackle out of parallel. The chief engineer of the Willamette Iron & Steel Works testified! that in his opinion the pin was a good piece of metal before it broke, and that its appearance indicated a tough and live metal. On the other hand, an instructor in a local polytechnic school testified that the appearance of the pin indicated that it was crystallized, and several witnesses, who were longshoremen, or sailors, or workmen, also testified that the pin…

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.