Document: 357 U.S. 221 78 S.Ct. 1201 2 L.Ed.2d 1272 Richard McALLISTER, Petitioner,v.MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM COMPANY. No. 83. Argued April 1, 1958. Decided June 23, Mr. Arthur J. Mandell, Houston, Tex., for petitioner. Frank C. Bolton, Jr., Dallas, respondent. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The question in this case is whether a state court may apply its two-year statute limitations to bar an unseaworthiness action that joined with negligence under Jones Act. Petitioner was member crew vessel owned and operated by His back injured Oct. 19, 1950, when he slipped fell down stairway leading from lounge galley. He reported injury, ship's log book supports his allegation steps were wet. At termination voyage petitioner consulted doctor about pain stiffness back. Intermittent medical attention failed arrest deteriorating condition. In March 1953, specialist orthopedics diagnosed difficulty as ruptured discs between vertebrae. By July 6, could no longer perform duties aboard respondent's vessel, on date entered United States Public Health Marine Hospital seaman. After discharge attorney state-court filed Aug. 27, District Court Dallas County, Texas 3 claimed damages Act negligence1 general maritime law unseaworthiness. also asked maintenance cure law. alleged portholes deck at head stairs not watertight, they allowed water accumulate stairs, condition proximate cause fall. Respondent's answer denied allegations unseaworthiness, averred petitioner's claims barred pertinent statutes laches. trial ruled actions barred, after hearing evidence submitted all three jury.2 jury returned special verdicts importing following findings: while attempting walk question; above near watertight; these defects due respondents; did make unseaworthy.3 Pursuant findings, judgment respondent counts, awarded $6,258 cure. 4 Both parties appealed Civil Appeals. Respondent sought overturn award cure, but court's decision respect affirmed portion before us. took appeal so far it concerned claim Act, outside scope our review. Limiting aspect case, assigned errors admitting instructing jury. Appeals found unnecessary rule upon questions, pertaining personal injuries.4 290 S.W.2d 313. Supreme refused application writ error. view importance ruling injury litigation courts, we granted motion leave proceed forma pauperis, certiorari. 352 1000, 77 580, 545. 5 take us decide broad free own limitation admiralty right which prescribed, or bound determine timeliness such doctrine laches.5 For reasons stated hereafter, simply hold where combined cannot former shorter period than Congress has prescribed latter. We think admiralty, federal courts. 6 appropriate must be determined eye practicalities litigation. When seaman means recovery against employer: (1) (2) (3) Without elaborating nature actions, sufficient say are varied their elements proof, type defenses, extent will rarely forego sue three. But if both negligence, do single proceeding. That consequence Court's Baltimore S.S. Co. v. Phillips, 274 316, 47 600, 71 L.Ed. 1069, held alternative 'grounds' action. A seaman's libel complete 'bar' subsequent same injuries 7 Since order full utilization remedies since can accomplished only proceeding, time effects substance similar provided shall have years bring Act.6 reduce applying Engel Davenport, 271 33, 46 410, 70 813; cf. Cox Roth, 348 207, 75 242, 99 260. As essential corollary proposition, qualify affixing concurrent unseaworthiness.7 To sure, extinguished State imposes injury. practical necessity combining action, supra, effectively diminishes within commence result falls short affording seamen 'the benefit law,' Garrett Moore-McCormack Co., 317 239, 243, 63 246, 250, 87 entitled courts undertake adjudicate 8 Because thought limitations, had occasion consider assignment error connection judge's instructions argued matter, furtherance what deem sound judicial administration, Weyerhaeuser Nacirema Operating 355 563, 569, 438, 442, 491, time. charges set out margin8 erroneous. They carried incorrect implication recover defect quality rendered whole unfit purpose intended.9 It well settled owner liable indemnify caused appurtenant appliances equipment * *.' Mahnich Southern 321 96, 99, 64 455, 457, 88 561. 9 vacated, remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 10 ordered. 11 Judgment vacated directions. 12 BRENNAN, concurring. 13 While I join Court, believe proper add few words because suggestion dissent intimates would applied longer. find indication Indeed, theory precludes consideration problem. correctly based employer's vessel. More generally, whether, enforce federally created governed 14 resolving touch delicate problems federalism inevitable working viable scheme enforcing rights Cf. Testa Katt, 330 386, 67 810, 91 967. Where statutes, create include been practice limitations. See Campbell City Haverhill, 155 610, 616, 15 217, 219, 39 280; Cope Anderson, 331 461, 1340, 1602. On other hand, establishes enforcement rights, integral part created, brought longer, Atlantic Coast Line R. Burnette, 239 199, 36 75, 60 226, shorter, 813. This two factors aligned pattern those decisions. First, deal judicially Pope & Talbot, Inc., Hawn, 346 406, 74 202, 98 143; second, establishing fixed right. first factor, remedy rather legislatively fairly considered problem applies absence specific directions leads necessarily should cases sort. reason considerations prompted resort here. Those represented intensely solutions administration justice. any comparable might applied, four choices: No all; arbitrary applicable like cases; flexible uncertain laches; (4) chosen default. 16 default necessary look elsewhere measure Just equity follows applying, rough law, see Russell Todd, 309 280, 287, 527, 530, 84 754, measured analogous U.S.C. § 688, U.S.C.A. 688. reference seems especially aspects 1069. 17 thus me three-year remedy, 45 56, ready logical source draw determining enforced. court, just supra. Such harmony state-created rights. Western Fuel Garcia, 257 233, 42 89, 66 210. subjecting parties' variant consequent uncertainty legal obligation inject unnecessarily sporting element into affairs men. Guaranty Trust N.Y. York, 326 65 1464, 89 2079. mischief avoided possibility shopping forum most favorable arising sea, frequently beyond territorial bounds State, normal choice-of-law doctrines likely prove inadequate task supplying certainty predictability. 18 advised anything more repose, disruptive desired uniformity Pacific Jensen, 244 205, 37 524, 61 1086; 19 WHITTAKER, whom FRANKFURTER HARLAN join, dissenting. 20 With respect, feel compelled express my disagreement holding 'that latter.' 21 Although laws, each creates separate independent conduct covered made redressable other, though designed one authorizing, respective terms, bodily suffered course employment. Under warrants gear defects, pay occasioned breach warranty. even 'negligence officers contributed (for negligence) insulate liability failure furnish seaworthy Steamship 100—101, 458, (Emphasis supplied.) 'before was, respects, responsible members crew.' Id., page 101, 458. 22 fill gap owner's liability, making him operating crew, passed 1920, which, part, provides: 23 'Any who suffer employment may, election, maintain jury, modifying extending common-law railway employees 24 thus, incorporated provisions Federal Employers' Liability Act,1 which2 carrier 'injury death resulting officers, agents, carrier, insufficiency, boats, wharves, equipment' (emphasis supplied), provides, '(n)o maintained chapter unless commenced day accrued.' makes clear unqualified sustained through keep safe colloquially called 'ship-shape,' supplements imposing tort operation gear. 25 then, new then known carrier,' required suit thereunder years. commenced. 26 Numerous decisions established that, silent matter brought. 463, 1341, 1602; Holmberg Armbrecht, 327 392, 395, 582, 584, 90 743; Rawlings Ray, 312 97, 473, 85 605; Chattanooga Foundry Pipe Works Atlanta, 203 390, 397, 27 65, 66, 51 241; McClaine Rankin, 197 154, 158, 411, 49 702, Brady Daly, 175 148, 62, 44 109. opinion, 'a limitations' latter, recognizes permits conjoined count whose laws provide equal commencement quite inconsistent. know many period, others escape conviction long-established rule, expressive meaning silence fixing enforced none. am therefore unable why, argues, Act' or, transposing—as proper—the names used argument, why (Jones Act) unseaworthiness),' i.e., extends when, here, prescribes true, points out, holds inasmuch redress otherwise final principles res judicata. say, 'effects limitation' other. Surely not, suit, statute. seem counts neither either barred. 28 I, therefore, 'where latter' for, observed, sits, instances commencing think, immaterial question. However desirable coterminous uniformly periods coordinate accomplishment change properly us, Congress. 29 Here State. Therefore, correct reason, affirm judgment. Recent authorities disposed suggestions earlier exercise election McCarthy American Eastern Corp., Cir., F.2d 724; Balado Lykes Bros. 179 943; Williams Tide Water Associated Oil 227 791. 143. Gilmore Black, Law Admiralty, §§ 6—23—6—25. negative findings finding contributorily negligent, require $32,500 compensate loss earnings, diminished earning capacity, past future expenses, suffering. 'There prosecuted accrued, afterward, suits description: '6. Action person another.' Vernon's Ann.Rev.Civ.Stat.Art. 5526. reserved 36, Lower divided related govern side court. Compare Henderson Cargill, D.C., 128 F.Supp. 119; Apica Pennsylvania Warehousing Safe Deposit 819; 101 575; Untersinger Keystone Tankship 1948 A.M.C. 1899; Bonam Menhaden 284 F. 360; Oroz President Lines, 154 241. incorporates 56. adopted 1920 FELA Some suggested 11, 1939, 53 Stat. 1404, extended years, effect extension E.g., Benedict, (6th ed., Knauth, 1940), 469. contrary now taken established. 210, 244, 260; McCrady Rodgers 164 591, 592; Streeter Great Lakes Transit 466; Gahling Colabee 759; Royle Standard Fruit 269 App.Div. 762, 54 N.Y.S.2d 778. Le Gate Panamolga, 689. longshoreman claiming reversed basis However, libellant going claim, 'harsh result' limit suit. reconsider laches given burden showing prejudice inexcusable delay. And Cross Allen, 141 528, 67, 35 843 (laches foreclose mortgage long run underlying debt); Mack, 295 480, 489, 55 813, 818, 79 1559 ('Laches term defense law.'). 'Special Issue (and 14). Do you preponderance windows (or 'deck galley') being watertight condition, issue 13), ship 'unseaworthy,' defined herein? 'You instructed herein, fittings reasonably fit purposes used.' jurors puzzled over charge. retiring juryroom inquiry judge: 'In unseaworthy referring whole, port side?' Plaintiff thereupon requested judge instruct meant declined further answered request them definition charge, presumably quoted note 8, et seq., seq. 51, 51.

Category: 7