Foster v. Destin Trading Corp.
Supreme Court of Louisiana
1DissentCalogero, Chief Justice
I dissent from the majority opinion because I believe that the vessel in question was indeed unseaworthy. Plaintiff is entitled to recover a mitigated amount of damages due to his own negligence in helping to create the unseaworthy condition.
*830The majority properly points out that the nature of the duty owed by a vessel owner to furnish a seaworthy vessel is-absolute and nondelegable. Moreover, a determination of a shipowner’s liability for the unseaworthiness of its vessel is completely divorced from the concepts of negligence and independent of its duty under the Jones Act to exercise…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Charles D. Gautreaux v. Scurlock Marine, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
- Whitney Allen v. Seacoast Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Gordon H. Hubbard and Shirley M. Hubbard v. Faros Fisheries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
- Symonette Shipyards, Ltd. v. Lee Clark, Lee Clark v. Symonette Shipyards, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.