|
|
Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406 (1953)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406 (1953)
Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn No. 13 Argued October 12, 1953 Decided December 7, 1953 346 U.S. 406
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Plaintiff, a carpenter employed by an independent contractor, was injured while working on a ship berthed on navigable waters in Pennsylvania. Basing jurisdiction on diversity of citizenship, he brought a civil action for damages against the shipowner in a federal district court in Pennsylvania, alleging negligence and the ship’s unseaworthiness. The shipowner pleaded contributory negligence as a defense, and brought in the contractor as a third-party defendant, alleging that the injury resulted from the contractor’s negligence and claiming recovery against the contractor by way of contribution or indemnity. A jury found that the ship was unseaworthy, that both the shipowner and the contractor were negligent, and that the plaintiff’s own negligence had contributed to his damages.
Held: Plaintiff’s judgment against the shipowner is affirmed, and the shipowner is not entitled to a judgment against the contractor for contribution. Pp. 407-414.
1. Plaintiff’s contributory negligence was not a complete bar to his recovery. Pp. 408-411.
(a) In admiralty, contributory negligence may mitigate, but does not bar, recovery for personal injuries. Pp. 408-409.
(b) Since plaintiff was injured on navigable waters while working on a ship, the basis of his action is a maritime tort, and his rights are not determined by Pennsylvania law. Pp. 409-411.
(c) Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, does not require a different result. Pp. 410-411.
2. Plaintiff’s judgment against the shipowner should not be reduced by the amount of compensation payments plaintiff has received from his employer under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. Pp. 411-412.
3. This Court declines to overrule or distinguish Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki, 328 U.S. 85. Pp. 412-413.
4. The plaintiff, not being a seaman, is not barred by The Osceola, 189 U.S. 158, from maintaining a negligence action against the shipowner. Pp. 413-414.
5. A judgment for the shipowner against the contractor for contribution is barred by Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp., 342 U.S. 282. P. 408.
198 F.2d 800 affirmed.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406 (1953) in 346 U.S. 406 346 U.S. 407. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DYLBYGKN1P6NMA9.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406 (1953), in 346 U.S. 406, page 346 U.S. 407. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DYLBYGKN1P6NMA9.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406 (1953). cited in 1953, 346 U.S. 406, pp.346 U.S. 407. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DYLBYGKN1P6NMA9.
|