Legal Opinion

Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. Smith

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 3, 1939No. 195PublishedCited by 351 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stone

The question is whether assumption of risk is a defense in a suit brought by a seaman under the Jones Act to recover for injuries resulting from his use, while on duty, of a defective appliance of the ship, when he chose to use the unsafe appliance instead of a safe method of doing his work, which was known to him.

Respondent, a seaman, brought the present suit in the District Court for southern New York to recover, under the Jones Act, 41 Stat. 1007, 46 U. S. C. § 688, for an injury received from a fall in the engine room of petitioner’s vessel. The fall was caused by a defective step on…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. The OsceolaSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  2. Calmar Steamship Corp. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Cortes v. Baltimore Insular Line, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  4. Chelentis v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
  5. Jamison v. EncarnacionSupreme Court of the United States · 1930

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

3Cited by351 opinions

  1. Seas Shipping Co. v. SierackiSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. HawnSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  3. Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Garrett v. Moore-McCormack Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  5. Garrett v. Moore-Mccormack Co., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943

346 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