Legal Opinion · Dissent

Berry v. American Commercial Barge Lines

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 27, 1983No. 82-4Published

1DissentJustice Kasserman

It is my opinion that the trial court erred in giving plaintiff’s instruction No. 21; therefore, I must respectfully dissent.

The majority in its opinion recognizes that it is essential to a proper determination of the question of whether plaintiff was entitled to maintain this action under the Jones Act that the jury be accurately instructed as to the proper definition of the words “seaman” and “member of the crew.” It is my opinion that plaintiff’s instruction No. 21 fails in this respect; therefore, the giving of such instruction constituted reversible error.

The authority cited as…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Offshore Co. v. RobisonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
  2. South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. BassettSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. Senko v. LaCrosse Dredging Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. McKie v. Diamond Marine Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953
  5. Raymond E. McMillen Jr. v. United States of America, Douglas Gruchy v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1967

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API