Court Opinion

ID: 9651298
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 16:12:56.34113+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:31.689000
License: Public Domain

L. HAND, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I do not think that in Grasso v. Lorent-zen 1 we decided that the duty of seaworthiness to a stevedore extended only to the time when he enters the ship; but, even if we had, the decision of the Supreme Court in Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki, 2 has now assimilated a stevedore to a seaman in this respect, and, as I understand the law, the shipowner’s duty to provide seamen with a seaworthy ship continues while he is aboard. In The Osceola,3 Justice Brown, as the second ground of liability said: “That the vessel and her owner are, both by English and American law, liable to an indemnity for injuries received by seamen in consequence of the unseaworthiness of the ship, or a failure to supply and keep in order the proper appliances appurtenant to the ship.” The Sixth Circuit made this the basis of its decision in Patton-Tully Transp. Co. v. Turner,4 and, although I can find no later decision again so deciding, that case has been repeatedly cited with approval. If the case at bar turned upon whether the oil was spilled upon the hatch cover before the gang started to work, I should find difficulty in affirming the finding of fault; but I vote to do so for the foregoing reasons.

 2 Cir., 149 F.2d 127.

 328 U.S. 85, 66 S.Ct. 872, 90 L.Ed. 1099.

 189 U.S. 158, 175, 23 S.Ct. 483, 487, 47 L.Ed. 760.

 269 F. 334.