Admiralty Commons^™

Conflict Of Laws-Law Applicable In Federal Courts-Federal Law Applied To Contractual Relations Of Admiralty Lawyer, Robert E. Thorne S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff attorney was retained by a Spanish seaman to prosecute personal injury claims under the Jones Act and the general maritime law. Defendant shipping company induced the seaman to fire his lawyer and to recover instead under his Spanish employment contract. Plaintiff sued the shipping company in tort for interference with contractual relations. In a federal diversity suit, held, for plaintiff. Federal common law should be applied to determine the validity of the contract and the claim of tortious interference with it. Greenberg v. Panama Transp. Co., 185 F. Supp. 320 (D. Mass. 1960).

International Control Of The Safety Of Nuclear-Powered Merchant Ships, William H. Berman, Lee M. Hydeman

Michigan Law Review

In recent years we have witnessed the transition of nuclear-powered ships from an imaginative dream to an engineering reality. This vast step from the drawing board to successful operation on the high-seas has taken place in a remarkably short span of time. Nevertheless, in the :flush of enthusiasm over the technological achievement, we must not lose sight of the fact that the promise of nuclear power for the propulsion of ships will not have been fulfilled until nuclear vessels are operating safely and economically over the maritime trade routes of the world. It would be unrealistic to assume that further …

Admiralty - Wrongful Death Statutes - Use Of State Law, Louis Frey

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner's decedent, a carpenter, was employed by a contractor hired to repair the Bonneville Dam, which is owned and operated by the United States. During the course of his employment, decedent was drowned when the boat he was in capsized in the water below the dam. Petitioner sued the United States in federal district court under the Federal Tort Claims Act, alleging that the accident was caused by the negligence of employees of the United States who were operating the dam. The claim was based on the Oregon Wrongful Death Statute and on the Oregon Employer's Liability Law, which, in …

Maritime Lien Priority, Wentworth J. Marshall Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

The question of priorities among maritime liens arises whenever the proceeds of sale of a ship are insufficient to satisfy all claims. The court must then proceed to the ranking of the claims to determine those which should be satisfied. Unfortunately, the law of maritime lien property is much like the sea itself in that it seldom appears the same twice. No doubt the confusion and uncertainty surrounding the topic are occasioned in part by the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has had less to say about lien priorities than any other subject within the entire …

Admiralty - Collision - Last Clear Chance, Erik Stapper

Michigan Law Review

The City of Calcutta anchored in the navigation channel as an emergency precaution on a foggy night. The vessel was hit by a scow in tow of the tug Brooklyn, whose navigator had observed the anchored ship for ten minutes. The scow sank and its owner sought to hold the City of Calcutta liable for failure to get underway after the fog had lifted. Held, libel dismissed. Even if the Calcutta was remiss in not moving, no liability could attach because the Brooklyn had the last clear chance of avoiding the accident. Arundel Corp. v. The City of …

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 - Limitation Of Liability - Right Of Vendor Of Chattel To Limit Liability, Bruce L. Bower S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The United States sold a steam tanker to S corporation and S delivered the vessel to T corporation for repairs. While it was moored at T's pier there was an explosion on board which caused extensive damage to the vessel and killed or injured fifty-two persons. T filed a libel against the United States alleging that at the time of the sale to S the United States also had sold, by a separate contract, a quantity of oil located in the vessel. The libelant further alleged that the United States, having represented the oil to be of one type …

Admiralty- "Twilight Zone" In Workmen's Compensation - Pursuit Of State Common Law Action Against Employer, James S. Leigh

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner was injured on his employer's barge moored in navigable waters while assisting in a loading operation. The employer was insured solely under the Federal Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Act. Instead of pursuing the remedy available under the federal act, petitioner brought the common law action authorized by state workmen's compensation legislation in the state courts. The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed judgment for the employer on the ground that the injury was covered exclusively by the federal act. On certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, held, reversed per curiam, two justices dissenting. The injury was incurred within the …

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 - Death On The High Seas Act - Effect On Workmen's Compensation Recoveries, Thomas E. Kauper S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Decedent, aboard an airliner in his capacity as flight service supervisor, was killed when the plane crashed into the Pacific. Respondent airlines, decedent's employer, filed an application with the California Industrial Accident Commission to determine its liability under the California Workmen's Compensation Act. The commission awarded decedent's widow a death benefit despite the widow's objection to the commission's jurisdiction. Prior to the award the widow as administratrix of decedent's estate initiated this action under the Death on the High Seas Act (DHSA) in admiralty. On motion for summary judgment in respondent's favor, held, motion granted. DHSA is applicable to …

The Jones Act: The Employer As An Insurer; Constitutional Aspects, Douglas M. Fryer

Washington Law Review

In Kernan v. American Dredging Co., the United States Supreme Court categorically rejected negligence as a test of liability under the Jones Act. Thus, for the first time the Court has stated what has been apparent for some time: that proof of negligence, in the common-law sense of the term, is no longer necessary to recover in a Jones Act suit. This Comment will attempt to trace the gradual erosion of tort theory as the standard and the re-establishment of what now seems to be liability without fault. A constitutional problem raised by this trend has not as yet been …

Marine Insurance And The Substantive Admiralty Law A Comment On The Wilburn Boat Company Case, Brunson Macchesney

Michigan Law Review

At the invitation of the editors, Professor MacChesney undertook to write this article especially for the memorial issue as a tribute to Professor Durfee, his former teacher.

Duration Of Seamen's Maintenance And Cure Rights, Howard S. Stern

Cleveland State Law Review

It is well settled that an injured or disabled seaman is entitled to "maintenance and cure" at the expense of the owners of his vessel at least until the end of the voyage,' provided that the need therefor exists that long. The minimum limits of this liability are fixed and certain, and have been so for over fifty years. The more important problem concerns the maximum limit of liability. Stating the problem in the form of a query: At what point does liability for maintenance and cure cease? On this point there is wide divergence of opinion. One of the …

Usn Commander W.R. Anderson Writes On Uss Nautilus Stationary A Summary Of The Ship'd Journey Across The North Pole, 1958, William Robert Anderson

Broadus R. Littlejohn, Jr. Manuscript and Ephemera Collection

Anderson thanks addressee Mr. Sickel for his interesting letter (not included) and summarizes the journey of the USS Nautilus under the polar ice cap and across the North Pole on August 3, 1958. The letter is typed on USS Nautilus stationary.

Book Review Of The Law Of Admiralty, Nicholas J. Healy 3d.

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Miscellaneous—State Not Liable Under Jones Act For Injuries To Its Seamen, Morton Levy

Buffalo Law Review

Maloney v. State, 207 Misc. 894, 141 N.Y.S.2d 207 (Ct. C1. 1955); 2 A.D.2d 195, 154 N.Y.S.2d 132 (4th Dep't 1956); 3 N.Y.2d 356, 165 N.Y.S.2d 465 (1957).

The Andrea Doria's Contribution To The Teaching Of Admiralty Law, Herbert R. Baer

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

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 …

Admirality - Jurisdiction - Action For Wrongful Death On The High Seas Limited To Admiralty, Robert Knauss S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff as widow and administratrix seeks damages from the United States for the alleged wrongful death of her husband on the high seas. Action was brought at law under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Government's motion to dismiss was sustained. There is no common law cause of action for wrongful death on the high seas. The federal Death on the High Seas Act gives a remedy to the representative only "in Admiralty," and thus jurisdiction is lacking at law in the district court. Kunkel v. United States, (S.D. Cal. 1956) 140 F. Supp. 591.

Admiralty - Collision - Duty Of Third Vessel To Give Warning, Michael Scott

Michigan Law Review

Washington, a private merchantman proceeding north at night through a large United States Navy formation steaming west, received no warning from formation commanders that Ruchamkin, an escort, was rejoining from the east. Uninformed of Washington's presence and ordered to resume station expeditiously, Ruchamkin entered the formation at high speed. Despite late radical maneuvers upon discovery of Washington close aboard, Ruchamkin was struck by the latter's bow with resulting damage to both ships. On reciprocal libels, held, decree for Washington's owner. In addition to Ruchamkin's failure to anticipate Washington, the United States was negligent in that the …

Admiralty - Jurisdiction - Quasi -Contractual Remedy, Ross Kipka S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioners paid money to respondent for prospective passage to Europe on his passenger vessel held out as a common carrier. When respondent failed to make the voyage or return the passage money, petitioners sued in admiralty for breach of contract. The libel was in the nature of indebitatus assumpsit for moneys had and received and wrongfully withheld by respondent. The district court held this an action based upon the breach of a maritime contract and therefore within the admiralty jurisdiction. The court of appeals reversed, on the ground that the action was in the nature of the common law indebitatus …

What Is A Vessel In Admiralty Law, Donald W. Peters

Cleveland State Law Review

Any structure made to float upon the water for the purpose of commerce or war, whether impelled by wind, steam or oars -this is the explanation of a vessel given in the American-English Encyclopedia of Law. A vessel has been further defined in the Revised Statutes of the United States as including every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation by water. A controversial question however, that often creates confusion, is this: When, during the course of construction, is a craft considered to be a full-fledged vessel. Theories and …

Maritime Lien Priorities: Cross-Currents Of Theory, Roger G. Connor

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this article is not to develop a synthesis, for no synthesis is possible, but to give an account of the general theories governing maritime lien priorities, together with a discussion of the concrete issues which arise in their application.

Admiralty - Constitutional Law - Effect Of State Regulation Of Marine Insurance On Uniformity Of Maritime Law, Charles G. Williamson, Jr. S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner's houseboat, used to transport passengers commercially on a lake between Texas and Oklahoma, was insured against fire and other loss by respondent. Following destruction of the boat by fire, respondent denied liability because of breaches of policy warranties against assignment, pledging, transferring, and use for hire. The petitioner's action was brought in the state court and removed to a federal court because of diversity of citizenship. Texas statutes provide that breaches of policy provisions by the insured are no defense unless the breach contributes to the loss, and that provisions in policies against pledging are invalid. Petitioner contended that …

Book Reviews, Clyde L. Ball, Walter Probert, Harry L. Snead Jr., Oliver C. Schroeder Jr., James M. Nabrit Jr., Roger A. Cunningham, Max P. Rapzcz, Robert J. Fower, L. J. Johns, Claude H. Brown, John T. Mcnaughton

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

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 …

Admiralty - Warranty Of Seaworthiness - Extension To Injury Caused By Appliance Not In Control Of Shipowner, George S. Flint S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Libellant, a longshore foreman for a stevedoring company loading petitioner's ship, was injured when a snatch block broke, causing some loading gear to fall upon his leg. Conflicting evidence in the lower court was resolved by the trial judge, who found that the snatch block was supplied by the stevedoring company. On the basis of this finding, the trial court held that neither the ship nor its appliances were unseaworthy, and that libellant could not recover against the shipowner. The court of appeals reversed and remanded the cause for determination of damages. On certiorari to the Supreme Court, held, …

Seamen Are "Wards Of The Admiralty" But Longshoremen Are Now More Privileged, John Ambler

Washington Law Review

The State of Washington has greatly contributed to the strange result which is the subject of inquiry here. Two important cases leading to this result reached the United States Supreme Court from this State. One case was appealed from the State Supreme Court. One was appealed through the Circuit Court of Appeals from a decision of the United States District Court in Seattle. The cases are almost thirty years apart. To appreciate the absurdity of the present state of the law some background material is needed.

Admiralty-Seaplane A ''Vessel" For Purpose Of Salvage, Eugene Alkema

Michigan Law Review

Defendant's seaplane landed at sea out of gasoline and without a compass. The m/s Batory took both the pilot and the plane aboard. In a libel for conversion of the seaplane, held, a cross-libel for salvage services stated a cause of action because a seaplane is a vessel for purpose of salvage. Gdynia-American Shipping Lines, Ltd. v. Lambros Seaplane Base, Inc., (D.C. N.Y. 1953) 115 F. Supp. 796.

The Seaman As Ward Of The Admiralty, Martin J. Norris

Michigan Law Review

The seaman has a peculiar status in American law. He is in most instances a mature individual, sui juris, and therefore capable of entering into his own contracts but nonetheless his contractual dealings with shipmasters and owners are as carefully watched by our admiralty courts as though he were a minor or a young heir. He is in contemplation of the maritime law a ward of the admiralty courts.

The seaman's position in a legal and economic sense is unique. Singled out by the Congress of the United States as one of a class of workers requiring special consideration …