## Facts

- A Staten Island Ferry owned and operated by the City of New York, the M/V *Andrew J. Barberi*, struck a concrete maintenance pier near the St. George Terminal on October 15, 2003, while carrying about 1,500 passengers.
- The collision occurred at roughly 14–16 knots and caused 10 immediate deaths, at least 19 serious injuries (with an additional later death), and many minor injuries.
- The City maintained an internal “two-pilot rule” requiring both the captain and assistant captain to be in the operating pilothouse when the ferry was underway.
- The two-pilot rule was not enforced; the City’s director of ferry operations knew captains routinely violated it.
- During the voyage, the assistant captain operated the ferry from the forward pilothouse while the captain remained in an aft pilothouse for other duties.
- A lookout was released from pilothouse duties as docking preparations began, leaving no qualified backup in or near the operating pilothouse.
- The assistant captain became suddenly incapacitated and failed to slow or steer; no one promptly recognized the problem or intervened before impact.
- Injured passengers and estates sued; the City sought exoneration or limitation of liability under the Limitation of Liability Act.
- After a bench trial, the district court found the City negligent and denied limitation because the causal negligence was within the City’s privity or knowledge.

## Issues

1. Whether the City exercised reasonable care by permitting operation with only a single pilot in the operating pilothouse without another person in or near the pilothouse ready to assist in an emergency.
2. Whether the City could limit liability under the Limitation of Liability Act, or whether the causal negligence was within the City’s “privity or knowledge.”

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment after bench trial.
- The City was negligent for allowing a single pilot to operate without at least one other person in or near the pilothouse who was aware of navigational circumstances and able to render or summon assistance.
- The assistant captain’s incapacitation did not break causation; the absence of a backup in or near the operating pilothouse was a substantial factor in the collision.
- The City was denied limitation of liability because managers knew of persistent noncompliance with the two-pilot rule and failed to enforce it, constituting privity or knowledge.

## Legal Principles

- In maritime passenger operations, the duty is reasonable care under the circumstances; compliance with minimum regulations and custom may be relevant but does not establish due care as a matter of law.
- Foreseeable risks of operator incapacitation can require redundancy in staffing and monitoring in or near the operating pilothouse, particularly for large passenger vessels in demanding operating conditions.
- An owner seeking limitation bears the burden to prove lack of privity or knowledge of the negligence or unseaworthy condition causing the loss.
- “Privity or knowledge” exists when the causal unsafe practice is managerial in origin or is a known, systemic failure to enforce safety rules.

## Conclusion

The court held the City liable for maritime negligence because its tolerated practice of single-pilot operation without an immediate, competent backup in or near the pilothouse fell below reasonable care, and it denied limitation because senior personnel knowingly permitted ongoing nonenforcement of the City’s own two-pilot safety rule.


In re City of New York, 522 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 2008)