Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co., 287 U.S. 278 (1932)
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.
Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co., 287 U.S. 278 (1932)
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 287 U.S. 251, click here.
Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co. No. 90 Argued November 17, 1932 Decided December 5, 1932 287 U.S. 278
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Syllabus
1. The provision in § 33 of the Merchant Marine Act that jurisdiction (meaning venue) of actions by seamen for personal injuries suffered in the course of their employment "shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located" refers only to federal courts. P. 280.
2. Where such action is in a state court, venue is determined by the state law. Id.
3. U.S.C. Title 28, § 837, (c. 113, 40 Stat. 683) provides that courts of the United States, "including appellate courts," shall be open to seamen without payment of or security for fees or costs in suits in their own name and behalf for wages or salvage and "to enforce laws made for their health and safety." Held that it applies to appellate proceedings in this Court, in a suit by a seaman for personal injuries, under § 33 of the Merchant Marine Act, which section is an amendment of the Seamen’s Act. P. 281.
4. Statutes passed for the benefit of seamen should be liberally construed in the light of the policy of Congress to deal with seamen as a favored class. P. 282.
306 Pa. 204 reversed.
Certiorari to review the affirmance of a judgment dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co., 287 U.S. 278 (1932) in 287 U.S. 278 287 U.S. 279. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XUMRHQ2TS2HP4SV.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co., 287 U.S. 278 (1932), in 287 U.S. 278, page 287 U.S. 279. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XUMRHQ2TS2HP4SV.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Bainbridge v. Merchants & Miners Transp. Co., 287 U.S. 278 (1932). cited in 1932, 287 U.S. 278, pp.287 U.S. 279. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XUMRHQ2TS2HP4SV.
|