NOTES ADMIRALTY LAW: DISTRICT COURT REFUSES TO FOLLOW EQUAL DIVISION OF DAMAGES RULE IN CASE OF MUTUAL FAULT IN American admiralty

IN American admiralty law, damages resulting from a maritime collision attributable to the fault of both parties are apportioned between the parties equally, without regard to the degree of fault of each. Since its inception, various criticisms have been leveled at this "divided damages rule," but courts have continued to adhere stubbornly to its application. The recent case of N. M. Patterson & Sons, Ltd. v. City of Chicago1 breaks with this tradition and apportions damages according to the fault of each party. The Patterson case arose out of a collision between the ship Torondoc and a drawbridge owned by respondent, City of Chicago. The ship owner, Patterson, filed a libel against the city for damages allegedly caused by the city's failure to maintain their bridge so that it could be properly raised. The city cross-libeled for damages to the bridge asserting the Torondoc's failure to comply with the navigation rules applying to ships proceeding under drawbridges. The District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, finding both the city and the Torondoc negligent in several particulars,2 held the