The defendant pleaded that the breaking away and damage were the result of an act of God, which consisted of "an unusually severe and extraordinary storm, and unusual and unprecedented conditions of weather, wind and tide " and that there was no negligence on the defendant's part which in any way contributed to the injuries inflicted upon the plaintiff's bridge. The barge was blown through the draw of the bridge and did no damage, but the dredge and pile driver were blown against the bridge causing injury to the latter, and the plaintiff brings this suit to recover compensation therefor. March 8th, 1931, these *īroke away in a storm. Moored to the docks were several boats, including a dredge, a pile driver and a barge, and about eleven a. The plaintiff owned and operated a pleasure park near Bridgeport, with a bridge over an arm of the sea connecting the park with the mainland, while the defendant owned a shipyard and docks a short distance to the north.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |