Legal Opinion
Forster v. Oro Navigation Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided December 7, 1955No. 118, Docket 23303PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Per curiam
We agree with what Judge Bondy said in his opinion, reported in 128 F.Supp, 113. We add the following as to one of appellant’s contentions which Judge Bondy did not consider.
46 U.S.C.A. § 596 imposes the duty of payment on “the master or owner”. We think that, if the master fails to pay without sufficient cause, his neglect becomes also that of the owner. *320so that either is liable.1 The statute, designed to protect seamen, must be liberally interpreted for their benefit.2 Accordingly, Compagnie General Transatlantique v. Elting, 298 U.S. 217, 56 S.Ct. 770, 80 L.Ed. 1151, interpreting a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Shilman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Wilder v. Inter-Island Steam Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Compagnie Generale Transatlantique v. EltingSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
3Cited by11 opinions
- Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Velidor v. L/P/G BenghaziCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
- Doyle v. Huntress, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- Gerassimos Vinieris v. Byzantine Maritime CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Governor & Co. of the Bank of Scotland v. SabayCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.