The city said the companies’ effort to limit responsibility for the vessel and the cargo’s value to $43.6 million is “substantially less than the amount that will be claimed for losses and damages” arising out of the Dali’s collision with the Key Bridge.

The owners of the Dali cargo ship were negligent and should be held fully liable for the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which killed six people, the city of Baltimore said in court filings Monday.

In response to the vessel owners’ petition filed in U.S. District Court this month seeking to limit their liability, Mayor Brandon Scott and the Baltimore City Council argued Grace Ocean Private Ltd. and Synergy Marine Pte Ltd. “put a clearly unseaworthy vessel into the water," and they called the companies’ actions “grossly and potentially criminally negligent.”

The city of Baltimore is demanding a jury trial, saying the companies’ effort to limit responsibility for the vessel and the cargo’s value at $43.6 million is “substantially less than the amount that will be claimed for losses and damages arising out of the Dali’s allision [collision] with the Key Bridge.”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is America, so I assume Grace Ocean will win and ships will be allowed to crash into bridges whenever captains feel the urge.

    • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Or if they lose, they close the company, file for bankruptcy, and reappear 8 hours later with a new AI generated name and logo and the same dangerous ships.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    8 months ago

    Relevant to the article is the US Limitation of Liability Act of 1851. This law allows a company to limit their total liability to the value of the ship and cargo. It’s a leftover from a different age where the US Government was trying to promote trade. Today, it’s used by companies to shirk liability when their greed and lack of care leads to death and destruction.

    • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      That law does not cover the owners if we can prove they put an unseaworthy vessel to work and we can prove they knew of its unseaworthiness

  • Somethingcheezie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    Don’t all harbours have “pilots” who come out and guide ships in and out of their harbours. Sort for the sole purpose of avoiding things like bridges

    • theareciboincident@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Genuine question: are you saying the harbor pilot/guide/whatever should have somehow simply fixed a total loss of power and control surfaces caused by negligent maintenance practices on a ship larger than the spaceship Enterprise instead of using those few minutes warning authorities to limit death and damage?

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Pilots are experts on their particular harbor, channel, etc. They have no responsibility though, that’s all on the captain, ship owners, etc.

      Also it’s pretty clear that you somehow know nothing about this incident.

  • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    82
    ·
    8 months ago

    Oh look it’s the exact fucking thing I said was going to happen, is happening, and all you chuckle fucks downvoted me into oblivion.

    Mark my words – only the taxpayers will be fixing this. Same as always.

    • ieatpillowtags@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      8 months ago

      You’ll be downvoted again, but it’s more that you’re an ass than your being wrong. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess you were being a dick last time too.

        • circuscritic
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          37
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Not only are those two not mutually exclusive, but they’re often comorbid symptoms under the larger diagnosis of being a “douchebag” or “prick”.

          On a related note, I have some bad news…

        • HubertManne@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          ill take petulant child actually between those two options. Im someone from the peanut gallery but man asshole is way worse than petulant child.

    • anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Apparently some are not familiar with socialized losses and privatized profits. Well gather round kiddos and I’ll recount the tale of Bear Sterns and the brothers Lehman.

    • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Haven’t you been posting this exact thing on every article about this crash? I’m pretty sure I’ve seen loads of people even combing through and pointing out the flaws in your original argument.

      Franky I don’t really care but you could just be annoying the shit out of everyone and that’s why you’re attacked with downvotes (as if that matters). You do you it’s not my place to tell someone how to go about their life. I just wanted to add some perspective as a non bias party