Legal Opinion
Warner v. Goltra
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided November 5, 1934No. 4PublishedCited by 205 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cardozo
The master of a tug-boat met his death on the waters of the Ohio River through the negligence of a pilot employed to navigate the tug. The personal representative brought suit against the owner under the Merchant' Marine Act of 1920, § 33 (41 Stat. 1007; 46 U. S. C. § 688) for the recovery of damages. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the complaint on the ground that a “ master ” is not a “ seaman ” within the meaning of the statute. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the judgment for the owner. 334 Mo. 396; 67 S. W. (2d) 47. The case is here on certiorari. 292 U. S. 617.
The statute…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Panama Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Cortes v. Baltimore Insular Line, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Chelentis v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- International Stevedoring Co. v. HavertySupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Jamison v. EncarnacionSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by205 opinions
- Helvering v. HallockSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- McDermott International, Inc. v. WilanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Chandris, Inc. v. LatsisSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Garrett v. Moore-McCormack Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
200 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.