An allowance of costs can be allowed for photographs of a vessel damaged in a collision.[i] However, such costs cannot be allowed for maps and surveys of the place where the collision happened.
In The S. V. Luckenbach, 197 F. 888 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1912), two vessels collided during poor weather conditions due to fog. There was much conflicting testimony regarding how the collision occurred and the density of the fog. The district court found that both parties were at fault. The court found that both parties guity finding that appellee failed to provide frequent warning signals under bad weather conditions and the appellant was negligent for moving into the wrong channel. However, the court found that appellant was entitled to half of the costs of photographs of the injured vessels and the interpreter’s fees.
In The Lafcomo, 64 F. Supp. 879 (D.N.Y. 1946), libellant who was the owner of a cargo brought a libel against claimant for damage to the large quantity of its cargo that was shipped in cases and arranged on the fore deck of a ship. The libelant objected to the exclusion of an item by the clerk described as cost of model of foredeck. The court held that the clerk properly excluded the item because the model was not necessary to understand the record by the court. Therefore, costs cannot be taxed to the prevailing party if the model of the foredeck of a vessel involved in an admiralty action for cargo damage.
[i] The S. V. Luckenbach, 197 F. 888 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1912),