Document: 386 U.S. 724 87 S.Ct. 1410 18 L.Ed.2d 482 James J. WALDRON, Petitioner,v.MOORE-McCORMACK LINES, INC. No. 233. Argued March 13, 1967. Decided May 8, Theodore H. Friedman, New York City, for petitioner. William M. Kimball, respondent. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The single legal question presented by this case is whether a vessel unseaworthy when its officers assign too few crewmen to perform particular task in safe and prudent manner. It resolve question, which lower courts answered negative1 has caused conflict among circuits,2 that we granted certiorari. 385 810, 59, 17 52. 2 Petitioner, member crew respondent's S. Mormacwind, was engaged with four other seamen docking operation at stern as it approached pier. At last minute, third mate, who directing docking, instructed put out an additional mooring line, heavy eight-inch rope, completely coiled on deck. mate then ordered petitioner another crewman uncoil rope carry 56 feet edge ship. While uncoiling portion ship, he fell injured his back. trial, Court Appeals recognized, '(t)here expert evidence effect 3 or 4 men rather than were required line order constitute 'safe seamanship." 356 F.2d 247, 248. Petitioner did not contend whole insufficiently manned there over-all operation. Neither seaman assigned him incompetent, itself defective. His sole contention mate's assignment two do work three constituted negligence made unseaworthy. District allowed issue go jury, found respondent, but directed verdict respondent unseaworthiness issue, holding above facts could not, matter law, unseaworthiness. Appeals, one judge dissenting, affirmed, holding: 'If someone solely reason act omission part any be possessed competence calling, can no recovery unless proved negligent.' F.2d, 251. here unnecessary trace history judicial development expansion doctrine That recently performed Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc., 362 539, 543—549, 80 926, 929—932, 941, where Court, rejecting notion shipowner liable temporary only if negligent, concluded: 'There suggestion decisions duty less onerous respect * condition may temporary. What evolved complete divorcement liability from concepts negligence.' U.S., 549, 550, S.Ct., 933. principle conclude failed apply their case. 5 basic justification, consistent broad remedial purposes unseaworthiness, drawing distinction between ship's equipment, hand, personnel, other. As regards classic arises either defectively equipped.3 In Mahnich Southern S.S. Co., 321 96, 64 455, 88 L.Ed. 561, however, clear avaiab ility sufficient gear board does prevent actual use defective constituting test seaworthiness applied 'when done.' Id., 104, 459. And Crumady Joachim Hendrik Fisser, 358 423, 79 445, 413, further clarified extent that, even though equipment furnished sufficient, misuse renders We emphatically stated basis our 'Unseaworthiness extends crew.' 427, 447. For proposition cited Boudoin Lykes Bros. 348 336, 75 382, 99 354, said, 'We see draw ship hand personnel other.' 339, 385.4 6 likewise here. being so, under makes difference fully complement overall operation, where' job done.5 themselves competent seamen, sound piece gear. By assigning both misused. 7 This analysis, believe, recognition needs protection dangerous conditions beyond control role which, shifting risk shipowner, provides protection. If had been pulley lifting would clearly protected load much it, protected. lacked strength ordinary efficient again Should denied merely because instead supplying unsafe gear, insufficient incompetent manual assistance, assistance? think not. When extended shipowner's longshoremen performing seamen's work, Seas Shipping Co. Sieracki, 328 85, 66 872, 90 1099—either pier, Gutierrez Waterman Corp., 373 206, 83 1185, 10 297, stevedore's Alaska Petterson, 347 396, 74 601, 98 798, employees independent stevedre ship-owner pro hac vice, Reed Yaka, 410, 1349, 448—we noted 'the hazards marine service, helplessness ward off perils harshness forcing them shoulder losses alone, range 'humanitarian policy' seaworthiness,' id., 1352, should delegating, shifting, escaping using others work. same token, able escape used machines physical 8 entitled present theory reversed remanded purpose. so ordered. 9 Reversed remanded. WHITE, whom HARLAN, BRENNAN, STEWART join, dissenting. 11 Under prevailing cases doubt negligent improvident officer, crewman, longshoreman result otherwise seaworthy unfit purpose used. 445. Likewise, argues, officer creates under-manned specific respect. He challenges therefore rule Second Circuit requiring plaintiff situations such prove also issuing equal calling. See Pinto States Marine Corp. Delaware, Cir., 296 1; Ezekiel Volusia 297 215, 91 A.L.R.2d 1013, authorities therein. majority agrees petitioner, least requires performance tasks whose completion calls more men. holds have gone jury claims. 12 my view, disposed grounds. true legally negligence, cannot many overlap. I claim identical says, petitioner's assertion 'negligence unseaworthy.' testimony supporting seamanship require move line. But ruled against claim, thereby deciding employed care task. To me, simply disagreed witness and, based himself helped him, decided imprudent four. Had thought considered men, issuance act. perhaps possible conceive circumstances find special record. adverse retrial adopts majority's resolution 247. Compare American President Lines, Ltd. Reder n, 345 629, Magdapur, D.C., F.Supp. 971; Koleris Good Hope, 241 967; instant Other Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth Circuits seem suggest different reached See, e.g., Ferrante Swedish 331 571, cert. dismissed, 379 801, 85 10, 13 20; Thompson Calmar 657, denied, 913, 259, 184; Hroncich Ltd., 334 282; Scott Isbrandtsen 327 113; Blassingill 336 367; June T., Inc. King, 290 404. critical discussion decision below, Col.L.Rev. 1180 (1966). generally Gilmore & Black, Law Admiralty § 6—38 et seq. (1957). statement, course, context results 'not disposition calling.' 340, 385. explained, provide 'competent meet contingencies voyage.' Ibid. recognized must adequate proper number men,' 251 (see, DeLima Trinidad 302 585; 404), proceeded well-manned aboard Mitchell, inadequate manpower 'may temporary.' 932. Note, 76 Harv.L.Rev. 819 (1963).

Category: 7