Court Opinion

ID: 9461467
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:15:01.227257+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:04.491210
License: Public Domain

RIVES, Circuit Judge
(concurring specially):
As to the reversal of the $12,000.00 inflation compensation award, I am, of course, bound by this Court’s recent en banc decision in Johnson v. Penrod Drilling Co., 5 Cir. 1975, 510 F.2d 234, and in Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co., 5 Cir. 1975, 510 F.2d 234.
As to the affirmance of the basic award of $138,000.00, I rely upon the rationale suggested by the Supreme Court in Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Corp., 1959, 361 U.S. 107 at 109, 110, 80 S.Ct. 173, 4 L.Ed.2d 142 even though Sentilles was a Jones Act case. I adhere to the view expressed in my dissenting opinion in Boeing Company v. Shipman, 5 Cir. 1969, 411 F.2d 365, and therefore think that the standard for judging the sufficiency of the evidence to require submission of a case to a jury in F.E. L.A. cases, Jones Act cases, and all other jury cases is the same constitutional standard. I think that the evidence in this case as recited in the majority opinion met the constitutional standard. I therefore specially concur.