the Philippines, 667 F.2d 324 (2d Cir.1981), as authority to the contrary. In that case, the Second Circuit stated that it had "formulated a more general principle, applicable not only to the ship’s gear but also to transitory conditions on the ship____” Id. at 328 (citation omitted). In Lieggi the plaintiff tripped on greased wire that was a part of the ship’s gear, although not defective in the sense of the malfunctioning winch in Scindia. Moreover, in Lieggi, the ship’s crew affirmatively undertook to correct the problem but failed to do so. 15 . We further note that this case is not one involving a basic appurtenance of the ship, such as the gangway in Sarauw v. Oceanic Navigation Corp., 655 F.2d 526 (3rd Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 914, 102 S.Ct. 1767, 72 L.Ed.2d 173 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Nor is this a case where the shipowner has
holding that where by virtue of state action access is limited but remains reasonable there is no such denial of access as entitles the landowner to compensation holding shipowner responsible to maintain safety of gangway supplied by stevedore where gangway was only means of access from ship holding that right of access to courts not infringed where prisoners supplied with an inadequate prison library so long as they were provided with appointed counsel holding that denial of access to carbon paper and reproduction equipment and denial of facetoface access to other inmates did not deprive an inmate of his right of access to the courts holding that the need to maintain the secrecy of the governments investigation outweighed the publics right of access to sentencing documents