Legal Opinion
Tate v. CG Willis, Incorporated
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided September 6, 1957No. 7754PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALTER E. HOFFMAN, District Judge.
This is an action in admiralty by thé domiciliary administratrix and the ancillary administrator of George Archie Tate, deceased, against C. G. Willis, Incorporated, seeking a recovery under 46 U.S.C.A. § 688, more generally referred to as the Jones Act. The first cause of action is for damages claimed to be due by reason of the alleged negligence of respondents. The second cause of action asserts damages for loss of consortium. The third cause of action demands recovery of the economic value of decedent’s life. Following the trial, libellants, in their…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Harris v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1931
- Kirincich v. Standard Dredging Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- Holm v. Cities Service Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Jackson v. Pittsburgh S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Peter Igneri and Theresa Igneri v. Cie. De Transports OceaniquesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Elaine Jones v. GriffithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Gardner v. National Bulk Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1962
- Alfred M. Massey v. Williams-Mcwilliams, Inc., Williams-Mcwilliams, Inc. v. A. M. MasseyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Canal Barge Co. v. GriffithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.