Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Legal Remedies

Michigan Law Review

Seaman

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Admiralty- Shipowner's Right To Indemnification For Loss Caused By Latently Defective Gear Supplied By Nonnegligent Stevedoring-Compnay, John W. Erickson Jun 1964

Admiralty- Shipowner's Right To Indemnification For Loss Caused By Latently Defective Gear Supplied By Nonnegligent Stevedoring-Compnay, John W. Erickson

Michigan Law Review

Defendant stevedoring company contracted to perform stevedoring services for plaintiff shipowner. Pursuant to its agreement to supply gear for the job, the stevedoring company supplied a latently defective rope, the breaking of which caused injury to a longshoreman, an employee of the stevedoring company. The longshoreman obtained a judgment against the shipowner under the doctrine of unseaworthiness, and in a separate action the shipowner sought indemnification from the stevedoring company. The district court, finding the stevedoring company not negligent, denied recovery. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed, one judge dissenting. On certiorari to the United States Supreme …


Admiralty - Unseaworthiness - Recovery For Injuries Resulting From Condition Arising After Commencement Of The Voyage, John L. Peschel Dec 1959

Admiralty - Unseaworthiness - Recovery For Injuries Resulting From Condition Arising After Commencement Of The Voyage, John L. Peschel

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a member of the crew of a fishing vessel, sustained injuries while disembarking when he slipped on a slimy substance on the ship railing. In an action brought against the shipowner, the seaman sought recovery on three alternative grounds: first, under the Jones Act based upon negligence; second, under general maritime law based upon the obligation of the shipowner to furnish a seaworthy vessel; third, under general maritime law for maintenance and cure. Judgment was entered pursuant to a verdict limiting the seaman to recovery for maintenance and cure. On the seaman's appeal from the adverse verdict on the …


Admiralty - Warranty Of Seaworthiness - Longshoreman's Choice Of Remedies, Richard E. Young Mar 1959

Admiralty - Warranty Of Seaworthiness - Longshoreman's Choice Of Remedies, Richard E. Young

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, employee of a stevedoring company hired to unload defendant's ship, was injured while operating a defective chisel truck in the ship's hold. The truck belonged to and was operated, maintained and brought aboard by the stevedoring company, the ship having no similar equipment. Furthermore, the stevedoring company was assumed to be aware of the defect prior to the accident. Plaintiff brought suit for damages against the shipowner alleging unseaworthiness, and the shipowner impleaded the stevedoring company as a third-party defendant. On motion by the defendants for summary judgment, held, motion denied. The shipowner is liable on an absolute …


Admiralty - Jones Act - Applicability To Dredge Employees As Seaman, Ross Kipka May 1957

Admiralty - Jones Act - Applicability To Dredge Employees As Seaman, Ross Kipka

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner, a laborer, was employed by respondent on a canal digging project. His duties were those of a handyman on respondent's dredge, which was temporarily attached to shore, and his work consisted of carrying supplies from shore to the dredge, cleaning the dredge, and doing errands ashore. The employee was not a member of a maritime union, but was a member of a laborers' union. He lived at home, worked on an eight hour shift, and brought his meals to his place of employment. He was not subject to the supervision of the officer of the dredge but received his …


Admiralty- Conflict Of Laws - Application Of The Jones Act, Robert B. Fiske, Jr. S.Ed. Nov 1954

Admiralty- Conflict Of Laws - Application Of The Jones Act, Robert B. Fiske, Jr. S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Admiralty traditionally did not give a seaman a right of action for negligence unless it could be attributed to the unseaworthiness of the vessel. An injured seaman was limited to two remedies: an action for maintenance and cure, or an action based on -unseaworthiness. To remedy this situation, Congress in 1920 passed the Jones Act. This act was framed in terms of "any seaman who shall suffer personal injury in the course of his employment," and gave to such seamen all the rights granted by statutes modifying or extending the common law right or remedy in cases of personal injury …