Citations
- 339 F.2d 148
Full opinion text
BARNES, Circuit Judge:
These are five admiralty actions consolidated for trial, and on appeal. Appellants are individual boat owners and various insurance companies who had paid for damage to, and “clean-up” of, various private pleasure yachts, which had been anchox'ed in Los Angeles Harbor, primarily in and about the Yacht Centre, Inc. This corporation occupied harbor space pui’suant to a lease granted by the Board of Hai’bor Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles (hereinafter the “City”). The damage occurx-ed as a result of an “oil spill” which itself occurred in the following manner.
On July 11, 1957, oil (pumped by Standard Oil Company of California to Matson Terminals through a 9,600 foot pipeline built by Gerwick, Inc., a corporation, for the City of Los Angeles, and accepted and operated by the City) spilled into the Los Angeles Harbor— some 1,400 barrels of it.
We will not go into a detailed discussion of the factual situation surrounding the building of the line, but mention only the necessity for some type of expansion joint at a certain spot therein to allow for expansion and contraction of the pipeline; the insufficient space (3%'0 between two required pipe straps (Ex. F) to permit the installation of an expansion joint; the substitution of a coupling device, known as a “Dresser Style 38 coupling”; the dispute as to whether this substitution was authorized, and if it was, whether or not it was authox’ized in writing and by whom; the failure of the substitute for the expansion joint to stand two hundred pounds px'essux-e on two occasions; the addition of 4 x 4 inch timbers to hold the coupling by wedging such timbers against the line; the trial run of 400 pounds pressure ; the Harbor Engineer’s instructions to remove the timbers; the written advice to the Harbor Engineer that these timbers had been removed; that some permanent blocking had to be inserted before the line could be safely put into use; and the subsequent acceptance of Gerwick’s work as “fully and satisfactorily completed.”
Jurisdiction below existed by reason of 28 U.S.C. § 1333, and Article III, § 2 of the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction here exists by reason of 28 U.S.C. § 2107.
In No. 18404, some twelve insurance companies sued, as subrogees of small boat owners, the City. The Standard Oil Company of California, a corporation, which pumped the oil in; Ben C. Ger-wick, Inc., a corporation, which constructed for the City the pier extension and pipeline involved; Dresser Industries, Inc., a corporation, which manufactured the coupling used by the contractor; Matson Navigation Co., a corporation, to which the oil was to be delivered for the “S.S. Lurline”; and C. E. Keiser, Sales Engineer for Dresser Industries.
In No. 18405, one insurance company, as subrogee of a small boat owner, sued the same defendants above named.
In No. 18406, the Yacht Centre, Inc., a corporation, the yacht mooring facility, sued the same defendants above named.
In No. 18407, eight small boat owners sued the same defendants above named.
In No. 18408, one insurance company, as subrogee of small boat owners, sued the same defendants above named.
In each action, the City filed claim against Gerwick for clean-up expenses, indemnity and contribution.
The trial court found against the City in favor of all plaintiffs, and against the City on its claim for indemnity and contribution.
In that connection, we quote in the margin Findings (24), (25), (26) and (27) in case No. 18408. Similar findings were made in each of the other actions.
The amount of damage of the respective plaintiffs was agreed upon by stipulation.
The district court concluded the City of Los Angeles was liable for its negligence in building and operating the oil line, and denied recovery to the City, both for (a) indemnity or contribution, and.