Vision Air Flight Service v. M/V National Pride

155 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir. 1998)

Facts

P purchased two refurbished airport refueling trucks for use at the Subic Bay International Airport in the Philippines. P arranged to have the refuelers shipped from Oakland, California to Manila. Madrigal (D) issued its bill of lading to serve as the contract of carriage for the shipment of the refuelers. The bill of lading included a clause that purported to limit D's liability to $500 on the entire shipment pursuant to the Carriage of Goods at Sea Act, 46 U.S.C. App. §§ 1300-1315 and which advised P that it could opt for higher liability by paying an increased freight charge. Vision declined to do so, and instead insured the refuelers with an independent insurance company. The refuelers were loaded aboard D's vessel M/V National Pride. P's representative, Anthony Jamora, was present at the pier to observe the off-loading of the refuelers. The stevedores in charge of unloading the trucks attached cables to each end of the truck, but did not use spreader bars to keep the cables away from the sides and the bottom of the trucks. The stevedores used tires as cushions between the trucks and the cables. The first truck was lifted by the ship's cranes, the cables shifted due to the weight of the truck settling into the sling formed by the cables. This caused the refueler to jolt noticeably and swing in the air. After the first refueler was placed on the pier and the cable strapping removed, severe damage was visible. The cables had crushed the sides of the truck's refueling tank, crushed its doors and fenders, and damaged its underside. The stevedores proceeded to off-load the second refueler in precisely the same fashion. The second refueler suffered damage similar to that incurred by the first. Both trucks were a total loss. P sued D and D filed a motion for partial summary judgment to limit its liability to $500.00 per refueler pursuant to the bill of lading and COGSA's liability limitation provision. The district court granted D's motion and P appealed.