Document: 373 U.S. 206 83 S.Ct. 1185 10 L.Ed.2d 297 Frederico Marin GUTIERREZ, Petitioner,v.WATERMAN STEAMSHIP CORP. No. 229. Argued March 21, 1963. Decided May 13, Rehearing Denied June 17, See 374 858, 1863. Harvey B. Nachman, San Juan, P.R., for petitioner. Antonio M. Bird, respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner, a longshoreman unloading S.S. Hastings at Ponce, Puerto Rico, slipped on some loose beans spilled dock and suffered personal injuries. He subsequently filed libel against Hastings, claiming damages injuries caused by ship's unseaworthiness negligence its owner, respondent corporation. The case was tried in admiralty before United States District Court court found following facts relevant present posture case. 193 F.Supp. 894. 2 cargo packed broken defective bags, which were being repaired coopers aboard ship during unloading. Beans out bags unloading, including from one bag broke open scattering about surface pier created dangerous condition longshoremen who had to work there. shipowner knew or should have known that injury likely result persons would around it negligent allowing so poorly stowed laden be unloaded. Petitioner fell injured himself, such proximately respondent's containers. 3 Although petitioner his over year after analogous Rican statute limitations ran,1 delay excusable no prejudice occasioned delay, since access all times stevedore's2 records contained potential witnesses available produced trial. Accordingly, trial entered money judgment $18,000 4 Respondent appealed Appeals First Circuit, reversed with directions dismiss action. 301 F.2d 415. It held not been negligent, as matter law, because 'had neither control nor even right control' pier. also stated did prove what particular he on, ones responsible fall might come 'for appears' may dropped due third party's negligence. As seaworthiness, lading containers, stating: 'The very fact obligations are 'awesome,' * suggests they handled prodigality. We unwilling recognize here.' Finally, conclusion below laches, availability when advantageous an opportunity examine them earlier date. That this prejudicial, concluded, shown witnesses' testimony variance sought certiorari adverse we brought here, 371 810, 40, 9 53, resolve apparently troublesome question shipowner's liability torts impacts shore. concluded must respect each three headings involved. I. 5 At outset met issue is said jurisdictional. Counsel candidly admits failure raise point below, but our practice will consider threshold reaching merits. McGrath v. Kristensen, 340 162, 167—168, 71 224, 228, 95 L.Ed. 173; Ford Motor Co. Department Treasury, 323 459, 467, 65 347, 352, 89 389; Matson Nav. States, 284 359, 52 165, 76 336 (admiralty case); Grace American Cent. Ins. Co., 109 278, 283, 207, 209, 27 932; Hope Providence Boardman, Cranch 57, 36; see Wheeldin Wheeler, 812, 58, 54; Brown Shoe 370 294, 305—306, 1502, 1512—1513, 8 510. 6 contends liable, least admiralty, impact alleged lack care felt rather than ship. Whatever validity proposition until 1948, passage Extension Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 62 Stat. 496, 46 U.S.C. § 740, swept away made vessels navigable water liable damage 'notwithstanding done consummated land.' carrier amici curiae limited actually physical agency vessel part it—such rams bridge winch drops onto longshoreman. Cf. Strika Netherlands Ministry Traffic, 185 555 (C.A.2d Cir.); Hagans Farrell Lines, 237 477 (C.A.3d Cir.). Nothing legislative history supports restrictive interpretation statutory language. There distinction between committed itself personnel while operating it, any more there 'committed' corporation employees. And ships libeled readily unduly bellicose mate's assault crewman, Boudoin Lykes Brothers Steamship 348 336, 339—340, 75 382, 384—385, 99 354; Rolph, 299 F. (C.A.9th Cir.), having incompetent crew master, Keen Overseas Tankship Corp., 194 515, 517 collision. Various farfetched hypotheticals raised, suit ordinary automobile accident involving officer business port, someone's slipping continue leak these warehouse Denver. think sufficient needs occasion hold within maritime jurisdiction under 740 when, commits tort3 unloaded, ashore time place remote wrongful act. II. 7 indicated, supra, unloaded their bagging, might, did, spill. substantial evidence support findings. Witnesses testified throughout corroborated torn discharging re-coopered. Moreover, entitled infer bagging bean leaking still ship, sent repair bagging. To sure, conflict details believe other. possibility other source, party, note plainly erroneous believing. force findings lessened contention 'even locus,' F.2d, 416. doubt license go upon docked clean up beans, if wanted to; But put aside, zone essential man barrel loft need sidewalk pedestrian whom hits. Byrne Boadle, H. & C. 722 (Exch.). same holds spills window, slips. allowed discharged discharge began. absolute nondelegable duty toward create risk him, failed meet. When culminated petitioner's injury, became legally compensate him harm. III. Two questions raised connection: (1) whether use containers constitutes unseaworthiness, (2) warranty seaworthiness extends cargo. first impression, decided favor Atlantic Gulf Stevedores, Inc. Ellerman Ltd., 369 355, 82 780, 798. bale burlap cloth metal bands wrapped bales, cf. Cotton-Tie Simmons, 106 89, 52, 79, bales hoisted hook winch. charged jury 'if you find defective, inadequate, insufficient then defendants doctrine unseaworthiness.' Id., 361, n. 3, S.Ct., 784. charge critical portion stevedore claim indemnity both Appeals' view jury's special This reinstated original 'there makes answers interrogatories consistent,' namely, covered proper therefore 'must resolved way (to avoid) collision Seventh Amendment.' 364, 786. could predicated defectiveness used contain thus disposition 11 holding consistent decisions.4 Seaworthiness limited, course, fitness travel high seas; includes loading Seas Shipping Sieracki, 328 85, 66 872, 90 1099. has already unsafely thereby recover unseaworthiness. E.g., Rich Bucknall 278 704, 706 Curtis A. Garcia y Cia., 241 30, 33—34 Palazzolo Pan-Atlantic 211 277, 279 aff'd grounds, 350 124, 134, 232, 237, 100 133; Morales City Galveston, 170, 1226, 1229, 412 (dictum).5 'latent defect' crate stood it. Reddick McAllister Lighterage Line, 258 297, 12 These cases reveal application doctrine, essence things hull, decks, machinery, tools furnished, stowage, reasonably fit purpose used. Mitchell Trawler Racer, Inc., 362 539, 550, 80 926, 941; 169, 172, 1230 (dissenting opinion). A leaks unseaworthy; container leaks. accepts faulty allows become faulty, assumes responsibility cause seamen substitutes belong inside anyone know, found, serious get underfoot. unfit unseaworthy. 13 second impression Court, although federal courts recognized law compels conclusion. Robillard L. Burbank 186 (S.D.N.Y.); Pope Talbot, Cordray, 214, 218 In Strika, working dock, improper wire cable hatch cover him. Building O'Donnell Great Lakes Dredge Dock 318 36, 63 488, 87 596, where recovered Jones Act owner's despite time, doing seamen's tasks permitted tort arises status relation 'cognizable (substantive) sea recovery assumed struck sacks brake properly. 14 Robillard, unseaworthy stowage overladen drafts, knocked off deck 'the logic authorities (Sieracki, etc.) ineluctable' denying 15 agree reading provide seaworthy gear, applies standing IV. 16 ruling laches reversed. test party. Gardner Panama R. 342 29, 30—31, 72 12, 96 31; Cities Service Oil Rico 305 171 (C.A.1st Cir.) (both unreasonable consequent prejudice). court, heard testify, prejudice. warrant reverse finding merely sooner did.6 Nor can inferred written judge credible; differ here does mean prejudiced delay—it means 'prejudiced' finder's refusal more. 17 erred setting aside. remanded further proceedings opinion. 18 ordered. 19 Judgment directions. 20 HARLAN (dissenting). 21 decision importance beyond appear surface. marks another stride development insurer those perform subject jurisdiction. While my primary disagreement goes I am unable views issue. 22 furnish intended staunch strong, fitted equipment good order, carries competent complement officers. Gilmore Black, Law Admiralty, 158. developed workers, reach transitory conditions arising voyage. 941. But, except few unpersuasive instances noted opinion, obligation remained relating essentially appurtenances. id., 933. extended view, quite questionably—to board stevedore, Alaska Petterson, 347 396, 74 601, 98 798,1 deemed His manner make unsafe work. See, e.g., Cir., 277; 30; 704; Carabellese Naviera Aznar, S.A., 285 355.2 23 however, bound determination last Term, 798, render admit language (369 U.S., 786) stand proposition. fair suggest negligence, attention focused there—indeed briefed argued. events frank say concurring case, distinct entirely eluded me, evidently dissenters, interpreted majority suggesting premised inspect 365, cited conclusion, Weyerhaeuser Nacirema Operating 355 563, 78 438, 491, touch So casual blindly accepted fastening far-reaching innovation. preclude us considering anew now fully squarely presented.3 24 Court's Ellerman, 412, strongest regarded establishing fundamental change cited. Morales, fumes emanating grain improperly treated excessive amount chemical insecticide. 'contaminated,' fault knowledge city shipowner, sustained lower not, circumstances absence forced ventilation system constitute 25 'What appurtenances, crew, isolated completely unforeseeable introduction noxious agent without. trier ruled, criteria, Grelmarion (the ship) service she put, cannot wrong.' 171, 1230. 26 crucial purposes dissenting opinions viewed terms ship: hold. Nowhere suggested arise solely virtue state itself, though contaminated clearly established dispute. Thus unanimously ignored today concludes less months earlier, Ellerman.4 order conclude presented necessary doubtful case—the closest came statement permitting weakened 'when result.' passes basic question: notice, constructive themselves. 28 Even assuming notice made, sustained, whatever finding. record, landing report, relates only company's bags. nothing employee area, unloading.5 course basis charging company. 29 Whether standpoint Presumably reached same—at consistency demands same—if occurred loaded Yet breached obligation, own equipment, property, responsible, without fault, injury. 30 affirm. Petitioner's Workmen's Compensation suits instituted date final Manager State Insurance Fund. Laws Ann. 11:32. Waterman Company, wholly owned subsidiary Company. considered, infra, p. 213-214. approval later decision, exception, joins here. involve (top-heavy machinery). brief 'petitioner's *, payroll indicated eyewitnesses, report named formed record Fund, indicating damaged prior discharge, medical treatment names treating physicians available, took deposition submitted *.' indicates never bothered interview Roman Cintron trial, them. contradict chose through discovery. hardly appropriate want sooner. connection October 1956; ran November 1957; January 9, 1959; began 1960—so much elapsed filing action witnesses, period laches. 6—3 unexplicated per curiam. majority, decisions, judges agreed stowage. said, alternatively, 'also latent defect cargo-crate.' 299. (Emphasis added.) do attach significance asked petition rehearing reconsider Petitioners lie broad discretion almost granted. Indeed, serves principally underscore briefed, argued, considered parties germane decision. along several cases, '(t)he method her cargo, improper.' Such proposition, different today. employed company, steamship

Category: 7