|
|
Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., Inc., 247 U.S. 372 (1918)
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.
Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., Inc., 247 U.S. 372 (1918)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 247 U.S. 367, click here.
Chelentis v. Luckenbach Steamship Company, Incorporated No. 657 Argued April 18, 1918 Decided June 3, 1918 247 U.S. 372
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
By the general maritime law, the vessel owner is liable only for the maintenance, cure, and wages of a seaman injured in the service of his .ship, by the negligence of a member of the crew, whether a superior officer or not, and this liability is not subject to be enlarged to full common law indemnity by the law of a state. Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 244 U.S. 205. So held in a case brought in a state court of New York and removed to the district court, to recover full common law damages from a Delaware owner for injuries received at sea on a voyage to New York.
Section 20 of the Seamen’s Act of March 4, 1915, c. 153, 38 Stat. 1185, declaring "seamen having command shall not be held to be fellow servants with those under their authority," was not intended to substitute the common law measure of liability for the maritime rule in such cases.
The Judiciary Act of 1789, § 9, giving exclusive original admiralty and maritime jurisdiction to the district courts, saves "to suitor, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it." Held that this, recognizing the fundamental distinction between rights and remedies, allows a right sanctioned by maritime law to be enforced through an appropriate common law remedy, but does not give a plaintiff his election to have the defendant’s liability measured by common law standards instead of those prescribed by the maritime law.
243 F. 536 affirmed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., Inc., 247 U.S. 372 (1918) in 247 U.S. 372 247 U.S. 373–247 U.S. 378. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N16DKREKQDCPDJ3.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., Inc., 247 U.S. 372 (1918), in 247 U.S. 372, pp. 247 U.S. 373–247 U.S. 378. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N16DKREKQDCPDJ3.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., Inc., 247 U.S. 372 (1918). cited in 1918, 247 U.S. 372, pp.247 U.S. 373–247 U.S. 378. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N16DKREKQDCPDJ3.
|