Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Willard
| Decision Date | 06 June 1951 |
| Docket Number | Docket 21989.,No. 251,251 |
| Citation | 189 F.2d 791 |
| Parties | MERRITT-CHAPMAN & SCOTT CORP. et al. v. WILLARD et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Galli & Locker, New York City, Urban S. Mulvehill, New York City, of counsel, for appellants.
Frank J. Parker, U. S. Atty. and Irving P. Kartell, Asst. U. S. Atty., Brooklyn, N. Y., William S. Tyson, Solicitor, Ward E. Boote, Assistant Solicitor, Herbert P. Miller, Washington, D. C., and Philip J. Lesser, New York City, Attorneys, United States Department of Labor, Employees' Compensation Division, of counsel, for appellees.
Before SWAN, Chief Judge and AUGUSTUS N. HAND and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
The question presented by this appeal is whether Thomas Nilsen, the deceased employee of Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation, was a member of the crew of the employer's derrick vessel "Commander," when he sustained the injury — a fall from a bosun's chair — which resulted in his death on February 26, 1946. The Deputy Commissioner answered this question in the negative, and accordingly found the employee to be within the coverage of the Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 903.
Whether an employee is to be classified as crew member or harbor worker is a question which has given rise to much litigation. Each case turns on its own facts and the administrative decision is not to be reversed if there was evidence to support it. The appellants do not challenge the Deputy Commissioner's findings of fact but contend that the undisputed facts and the inferences fairly to be drawn therefrom establish as a matter of law that Nilsen was a member of the derrick's crew; They assert that Norton v. Warner Co., 321 U.S. 565, 64 S.Ct. 747, 88 L.Ed. 430, rather than South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. Bassett, 309 U.S. 251, 60 S.Ct. 544, 84 L.Ed. 732, is the controlling authority to be applied in the case at bar.
The "Commander" was a nonself-propelled rigging barge with a derrick for loading and discharging heavy cargo, and at times she salvaged cargo from vessels which had foundered or lost cargo overboard. The crew consisted of captain, mate, engineer, guy-tender, and two "deck hands" of whom Nilsen was one. He had been attached to the vessel in this capacity for about ten months. He did not have and was not required to have seaman's papers; he was on a monthly payroll, paid semi-monthly, and worked from 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. five days a week, with time and one-half for overtime; he went home at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weiss v. Central Railroad Company of New Jersey
...a seaman's status. See South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. Bassett, supra, 309 U.S. 251, 60 S.Ct. 544, 84 L.Ed. 732; Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Willard, 2 Cir., 189 F.2d 791; Wm. Spencer & Son Corp. v. Lowe, 2 Cir., 152 F.2d 847, certiorari denied 328 U.S. 837, 66 S.Ct. 1012, 90 L.Ed. 16......
-
Pennsylvania Co v. Rourke
...a state compensation statute could not cover him. 5 Norton v. Warner Co., 321 U.S. 565, 64 S.Ct. 747, 88 L.Ed. 931; Merrit-Chapman & Scott v. Willard, 2 Cir., 189 F.2d 791, and Long Island R. Co. v. Lowe, 2 Cir., 145 F.2d 516, fall within a similar category. 6 See Gussie v. Pennsylvania R. ......
-
Travelers Insurance Company v. Belair
...principal duties, he is held not to be a crew member. E. g., South Chicago Coal and Dock Co. v. Bassett, supra; Merritt, Chapman & Scott v. Willard, 2 Cir., 1951, 189 F.2d 791. Although the cases employing this test typically have involved a worker who is employed full time on a vessel, but......
-
Zientek v. Reading Company
...South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. Bassett, supra; Kanischer v. Irwin Operating Co., 5 Cir., 1954, 215 F.2d 300; Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Willard, 2 Cir., 1951, 189 F.2d 791; William Spencer & Son Corp. v. Lowe, 2 Cir., 1945, 152 F.2d 847, certiorari denied 1945, 328 U.S. 837, 66 S.Ct......