divided damages
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 372 U.S. 597 - Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co. v. United States · 1963Most cited · 382 citing opinions
each party was entitled to recover from the other one-half of its provable damages and court costs
How the Supreme Court has restated “divided damages”
Each Supreme Court definition of “divided damages,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “divided damages”
Court decisions citing the 4 opinions that defined “divided damages” — 873 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 4 definitions, chronological · 1854–1963
- ORIGINAL
Upon this view of the case, it becomes necessary to settle the rule of damages in a case where both vessels are in fault. The question, we believe, has never until now come distinctly before this court for decision. The rule that prevails in the district and circuit courts, we understand, has been to divide the loss.… Under the circumstances usually attending these disasters, we think the rule dividing the loss the most just and equitable, and as best tending to induce care and vigilance on both sides, in the navigation.
mutual fault in collision
The fault of the brig does not excuse the fault of the steamer if the latter were, in any degree, a contributory cause of the collision. Both vessels being in fault the damages must be divided.
if both vessels are in fault, then the damages must be equally apportioned between the offending vessels