Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

The Breakwater

• 1894 • 155 U.S. 252 • Fuller Court
In the 1894 U.S. Supreme Court case, The Breakwater, a dispute arose over damages caused by a collision between two vessels: The Breakwater and The Conemaugh. Both ships were moving in foggy conditions when they collided near Philadelphia. Initially, the District Court ruled that both parties were at fault for not taking adequate precautions to prevent the accident due to poor visibility. However, upon appeal from The Breakwater's owners claiming their vessel was anchored during the incident...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Fuller Court
Term: 1894
Docket: 61
155 U.S. 252
15 S. Ct. 99
39 L. Ed. 139
1894 U.S. LEXIS 2270
Argued: Nov 09, 1894

The Breakwater

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1894 U.S. Supreme Court case, The Breakwater, a dispute arose over damages caused by a collision between two vessels: The Breakwater and The Conemaugh. Both ships were moving in foggy conditions when they collided near Philadelphia. Initially, the District Court ruled that both parties were at fault for not taking adequate precautions to prevent the accident due to poor visibility. However, upon appeal from The Breakwater's owners claiming their vessel was anchored during the incident and thus not responsible for any damage incurred by either party, this decision was overturned by Circuit Court which held only Conemaugh liable as it failed to maintain a proper lookout or slow down despite knowing about limited visibility due to fog. The case then reached Supreme Court where it upheld Circuit court’s ruling stating that while both vessels had an obligation of caution under such circumstances; however evidence showed that only Conemaugh violated these duties leading up to crash whereas there wasn't enough proof against Breakwater being underway during time of collision hence absolving them off liability.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for The Breakwater case, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold a ship liable for damages caused by its wake was unjust. The dissenting justices believed that the ship had not been operated negligently and thus should not be held responsible for any damage caused by its normal operation. They pointed out that all ships create wakes as part of their natural movement through water, and it is unreasonable to expect them to avoid causing any potential harm from this unavoidable consequence of sailing. Furthermore, they contended that if a dock or other structure cannot withstand these ordinary conditions without suffering damage, then it is poorly constructed or maintained and its owners should bear responsibility for any resulting losses. Therefore, in their view, holding ships accountable under such circumstances would set an unfair precedent which could have far-reaching implications on maritime law and commerce.

Opinion written by Justice HBBrown
Decided: Dec 03, 1894
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms