Document: 400 U.S. 494 91 S.Ct. 514 27 L.Ed.2d 562 Joseph Charles USNER, Petitioner,v.LUCKENBACH OVERSEAS CORP. et al. No. 47. Argued Nov. 18, 1970. Decided Jan. 25, 1971. Rehearing Denied April 5, See 401 1015, 1247. Syllabus Isolated, personal act of negligence by a fellow longshoreman resulting in injury to petitioner did not make shipowner liable on ground unseaworthiness vessel, as was caused ship's condition, appurtenances, cargo, or crew. There is 'complete divorcement liability from concepts negligence.' Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc., 362 539, 550, 80 926, 933, 4 941. Pp. 496—500. 413 F.2d 984, affirmed. H. Alva Brumfield, Baton Rouge, La., for petitioner. Kohlmeyer, Jr., New Orleans, respondents. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion Court. 1 The petitioner, employed an independent stevedoring contractor, injured while engaged with his employees loading cargo aboard S. Edgar F. Luckenbach. He brought this action damages against respondents, owner and charterer ship, federal district court, alleging that injuries had been unseaworthiness. 2 In course pretrial proceedings circumstances under which were fully disclosed, they are dispute. On day question ship lay moored dock Louisiana, receiving barge positioned alongside. operations being performed longshoremen direction their employer. Some men operating port winch boom at hatch. others barge, where job 'break out' bundles securing them sling attached fall each time it lowered operator. proceeding manner some time, until upon one occasion operator lower far enough. Finding beyond reach, motioned flagman standing deck direct farther. then fall, but he too fast. struck knocking him causing injuries. Neither before nor after occurrence any difficulty experienced winch, boom, sling, other equipment appurtenance her cargo. 3 respondents moved summary judgment District Court, single negligent could render unseaworthy. Court denied motion, granted leave take interlocutory appeal 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).1 United States Appeals Fifth Circuit allowed and, reversing directed respondents' motion be granted. 984. It appellate court's view "(i)nstant unseaworthiness' 'operational negligence' contractor basis recovery longshoreman.' F.2d, 985—986. We certiorari, 397 90 940, 25 114, because conflict among circuits basic issue presented.2 5 development admiralty law doctrine predicate shipowner's death has chronicled elsewhere, would serve no useful purpose repeat details here.3 Suffice recall its humble origin dictum obscure case 1922,4 based most extraordinary expansion series cases decided over last years.5 Court's decisions those have severely questioned, dissenting Justices others, history, reason, logic.6 present case, however, offers re-examine our previous decisions. may accept settled unseaworthy vessel extends members crew includes like petitioner.7 settled, too, though transitory,8 suffered elsewhere than ship.9 But these propositions do dispose us. For here goes very definition what not. 6 A major burden spelling out nature scope cause insistence point remedy separate from, of, additional claims shipowner, whether created statute10 general maritime law.11 More specifically, repeatedly taken pains wholly distinct negligence.12 course, how condition came into being—whether otherwise—is quite irrelevant owner's it. 7 emphasize distinction again 926. plaintiff's rail made slippery presence fish gurry slime. trial judge instructed jury held only finding slime long enough respondent learned about removed affirmed defendant holding least respect 'an arises during progress voyage,' obligation 'is merely see reasonable care used * incident correction newly arisen defect.' 265 426, 432. reversed judgment, courts wrong confusing What evolved law, we said, 933. 8 Racer involved defective physical part itself. means so limited. vessel's might arise number circumstances. Her gear defective,13 appurtenances disrepair,14 unfit.15 assigned perform shipboard task insufficient.16 method stowage, improper.17 reasons, reasonably fit intended service. 9 petitioner's crew,18 isolated, longshoreman. To hold individual rendered subvert fundamental between painstakingly emphasized decisions.19 supra, there existed unseaworthiness, error require conduct order liable. us presents side same coin. equally erroneous here, existed, third party's unforeseeable negligence. 10 ordered. 11 Judgment 12 DOUGLAS, whom BLACK BRENNAN concur, dissenting. 13 While working hatch result operation winch. member stevedores. lowering carried quickly far. 14 Prior 1970 Term denying reversed, probably hand. Mahnich Southern S.S. Co., 321 96, 64 455, 88 L.Ed. 561, furnish seaworthy appliances. also insulated 'negligent failure' officers Id., 101, 458. Mahnich, staging seaman fell appliance rope rigged. sound board used. fact mate boatswain selecting defense. 15 Crumady J. Fisser, 358 423, 79 445, 413, inherently Mahnich. way unsafe dangerous work rigging three tons stress, cutoff 'its safety device,' set twice limit. 427, 447 448. And broke seaman. paid recover stevedores whose pro tanto 16 Mascuilli States, 387 237, 87 1705, 18 743, use obviously hand liability, citing Crumady. 17 said 941, related 'reasonably suitable service.' Yet alongside conventional type developed concept operational Indeed, causes sturdy growth. Chief Stone, writing showed back Osceola, 189 158, 23 483, 47 760, 1903. U.S., 101—104, 458—460. intervening decision Plamals Pinar del Rio, 277 151, 48 457, 72 827, looked way, 1928. around Roberts Frankfurter turned dissent, saying unless followed precedent 'the becomes chart govern game chance; instead settling rights liabilities unsettles them.' 112, 463. They added: 19 'Respect tribunals must when bar public come understand nothing prior adjudication force current controversy.' 113, 20 bitterly expressed Rio overruled—a freak keeping mainsteam before. 21 Changes membership change decisions; changes expected level constitutional law. private rooted Constitution issue, surprising find new judges taking place judges. 22 Up today unseaworthiness.* I let continue prevailing rule Congress wisdom HARLAN, 24 Past expanded almost absolute liability. often protested development. See, e.g., cited ante, 497 n. 6. good conscience regard particular having (1959), even if inexorably result. As my Brother DOUGLAS states, cannot justly distinguished Much welcome thoroughgoing re-examination past developments doctrine, fear can compounding difficulties area 1292(b) provides follows: 'When judge, making civil otherwise appealable section, shall such involves controlling substantial difference immediate materially advance ultimate termination litigation. state order. thereupon, discretion, permit order, application within ten days entry order: Provided, That hereunder stay court thereof order.' Compare Candiano Moore-McCormack, Lines, 382 961 (CA2); Alexander Bethlehem Steel Corp., 963 Cleary Lines 411 1009 Venable A/S Det Forenede Dampskibsselskab, 399 347 (CA4), Grigsby Coastal Marine Service, 412 1011 (CA5), Tim American President 409 385 (CA9). 941; id., S.Ct., 933 (Frankfurter, J., dissenting); G. Gilmore & C. Black, Law Admiralty 315—332 (1957); Tetreault, Seamen, Seaworthiness, Rights Harbor Workers, 39 Cornell L.Q. 381. Carlisle Packing Co. Sandanger, 259 255, 42 475, 66 927. '(W)e think told without she left thus received damage thereof, entitled compensatory damages.' 259, 477. 67 561; Seas Shipping Sieracki, 328 85, 872, 1099; Pope Talbot, Inc. Hawn, 346 406, 74 202, 98 143; Alaska Steamship Petterson, 396, 601, 798; Rogers 849, 1120; Boudoin Lykes Bros. 348 336, 75 382, 99 354; 413; 926; Atlantic Gulf Stevedores Ellerman 369 355, 82 780, Gutierrez Waterman 373 206, 83 1185, 297; Waldron Moore-McCormack 386 724, 1410, 482. 105, 460 (Roberts, joined Frankfurter, 103, 882 (Stone, C.J., Burton, JJ., 419, 210 (Jackson, Reed supra (Burton, Jackson, Harlan Whittaker, 216, 1191 (Harlan, 729, 1413 (White, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart, dissenting). 872. 445; 1185. E.g., Jones Act, 41 Stat. 1007, 46 688. covered, provisions Longshoremen's Workers' Compensation 33 901 seq. maintenance cure. Calmar Corp. Taylor, 303 525, 58 651, 993; Jones, 318 63 930, 1107; Farrell 336 511, 69 707, 93 850; Warren 340 523, 71 432, 95 503. 94, 877: '(T)he neither limited conceptions contractual character.' 455. 382. 1410. A. 780; No case. reliance per curiam reversal misplaced. killed Government when, strain opposing pull two winches, heavy shackle parted, recoiled, him. petition certiorari posed questions: (1) Did play tightline condition? (2) handling proper create rendering unseaworthy? (3) Was 'equal disposition seamanship ordinary calling,' found 382? Our cases: 445. rope, seems evident, therefore, first gave affirmative answer. Second adopted unseaworthy, continuous cover used, Grillea 232 919, isolated carrying stress due act. Puddu Royal Netherlands 752. stated 'A glass window broken. who negligently breaks cut falling glass. incurred stepping broken does unseaworthiness.' 757. Circuit, refused follow decision. 961; 963; 1009; Tarabocchia Zim Israel Navigation 417 476. Fourth suit. 347; Lundy Isthmian 423 913. Only instant 1011, Ninth 385, stood Mascuilli.

Category: 7