|
|
Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930)
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.
Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930)
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 281 U.S. 121, click here.
Nogueira v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company No. 248 Argued February 28, 1930 Decided April 14, 1930 281 U.S. 128
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
N. was injured while employed by a railroad company as one of a gang of freight handler in loading freight into railroad car on a car float lying in navigable waters at a pier. The float was a vessel of 500 tons belonging to the company and was used in the transportation of such cars. The injury occurred on the float while N. was handling a piece of interstate freight.
Held:
1. That the car float, being in navigable waters, was subject to the maritime law like any other vessel. P. 134.
2. Since the injury was within the exclusive admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, a recovery for it through workmen’s compensation proceedings could not validly be provided by state law. Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 24 U.S. 205. Id.
3. The case is governed by the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, which prescribes exclusively the liability of employer where employees engaged in maritime employment suffer disability or death from injuries occurring upon the navigable waters of the United States and recovery through workmen’s compensation proceedings may not validly be provided by state law, and which excepts the master and members of the crew of any vessel and persons engaged by the master to load or unload or repair any vessel under eighteen tons net, but makes no exception of railroad employees engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. Pp. 131, 134, et seq.
32 F.2d 179 affirmed.
Certiorari, 280 U.S. 541, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals affirming a judgment dismissing the complaint in an action under the federal Employers’ Liability Act.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930) in 281 U.S. 128 281 U.S. 129. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=WAJPBPXR2HI7A7L.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930), in 281 U.S. 128, page 281 U.S. 129. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=WAJPBPXR2HI7A7L.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930). cited in 1930, 281 U.S. 128, pp.281 U.S. 129. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=WAJPBPXR2HI7A7L.
|