Cliffs-Neddrill Turnkey International-Oranjestad v. The Rich Duke
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
947 F.2d 83, 1992 AMC 1 (1991)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Cliffs-Neddrill Turnkey International-Oranjestad (Cliffs-Neddrill) (plaintiff) operated an oil-drilling ship, the Neddrill 2, which was anchored approximately 12 miles off the coast of Aruba. The Rich Duke was a tanker that was transporting crude oil in the vicinity of the Neddrill 2. The Rich Duke crew first spotted the Neddrill 2 on radar from approximately 11 miles away and realized that the tanker was on a collision course with the other vessel. The Rich Duke crew did not realize that the Neddrill 2 was anchored, however, and therefore believed that the Rich Duke had the right of way and held its speed and course. Once the Rich Duke crew realized that the Neddrill 2 was not giving way, it did adjust course, but it later adjusted course again in a way that had the effect of steering the Rich Duke directly toward the Neddrill 2. The Rich Duke struck the Neddrill 2. Cliffs-Neddrill sued the Rich Duke in federal district court and filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging that the Rich Duke was solely responsible for the accident. The Rich Duke alleged that the Neddrill 2 had failed to comply with a rule of safe navigation requiring it to display proper anchoring lights and that this failure had contributed to the collision. The district court granted Cliffs-Neddrill’s motion for summary judgment, and the Rich Duke appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cowen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
