Opinion ID: 665853
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Appurtenances

Text: 35 Finally, plaintiff contends that the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on plaintiff's claims of unseaworthiness. We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Jones v. Union Pac. R. Co., 968 F.2d 937, 940 (9th Cir.1992). 36 Plaintiff maintains that the plane transporting William Craig should be considered an appurtenance of the Brinkerhoff-I, and that the doctrine of unseaworthiness (or unairworthiness) is therefore applicable. We reject the argument. The DC-3 aircraft transporting Mr. Craig to Pekanbaru did not, and could not, land on the Brinkerhoff-I. It had no direct relation to nor was it an appurtenance to the vessel.