Wemhoener Pressen v. Ceres Marine Terminals
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
5 F.3d 734 (1993)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Wemhoener Pressen (Wemhoener) (plaintiff) was a German company that manufactured hydraulic presses. Wemhoener contracted with Polish Ocean Lines (POL), a carrier, to ship a press by sea from Germany to Ohio. The press had to be placed in a crate on a specialized trailer. Wemhoener declined to declare a specific value for the press in the bill of lading that accompanied the crate. Wemhoener and POL’s contract incorporated provisions in the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA). The contract also contained a clause authorizing POL to subcontract out portions of the carriage and providing that any legal protections enjoyed by POL would extend to any subcontractor. POL subcontracted with Ceres Marine Terminals, Inc. (Ceres) (defendant) to perform stevedoring and terminal services for the shipment at its initial United States destination in Maryland. Maryland state law prohibited certain limitation-of-liability clauses. The crate arrived in Maryland, was unloaded by Ceres, and held at Ceres’s terminal until railcars could take the press to Ohio. While using a cutting torch to remove the crate from the trailer, a Ceres employee set the crate on fire, damaging both the trailer and the press. The damage resulted in a permanent loss of performance to the press and decreased its value by hundreds of thousands of dollars. Wemhoener sued Ceres in district court. Ceres claimed that its liability was capped at $500 pursuant to COGSA and moved for summary judgment. The district court granted Ceres’s motion, and Wemhoener appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Britt, 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.