Burks v. American River Transp. Co., Civ. A. No. 77-420-A.
Decision Date | 07 March 1980 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 77-420-A. |
Citation | 486 F. Supp. 603 |
Parties | Joseph BURKS v. AMERICAN RIVER TRANSPORTATION COMPANY. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana |
Floyd J. Falcon, Jr., Dodd, Barker, Avant, Wall & Thomas, Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiff, Joseph Burks.
Eugene R. Groves, Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Phillips, Baton Rouge, La., for intervenors, Rogers Terminal and Shipping Corp. and Northwestern Nat. Cas. Co.
John O. Charrier, Jr., Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre, New Orleans, La., for defendant, American River Transp. Co.
Thomas K. Kirkpatrick, Kirkpatrick, Keyser & Kirkpatrick, Baton Rouge, La., for third party defendant, Rogers Terminal and Shipping Corp.
Joseph Burks works as a longshoreman for Rogers Terminal and Shipping Corporation, a stevedoring company, operating at the Port of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He works primarily aboard the K-1, a special kind of floating barge outfitted with a deck crane and other deck machinery which enables it to unload cargo from river barges directly into seagoing vessels. The K-1 is owned by Burks' employer, Rogers Terminal and Shipping Corporation (Rogers). On October 31, 1976, while standing on the deck of the barge ART-402, which had just been unloaded by the K-1, he stepped onto a hatch cover which gave way beneath him, precipitating him into the hold of the barge, where he was injured. The ART-402 is owned by defendant, American River Transportation Company (ARTCO).
Burks sued ARTCO, claiming negligence and breach of the warranty of seaworthiness of the ART-402. This Court, after hearing the evidence, dismissed the negligence claims, and the case has been submitted on the issue of Burks' entitlement to sue the owner of the ART-402 on the warranty of seaworthiness.
Traditionally, the warranty of seaworthiness has always been considered to be owed by a ship's owner to the seamen employed aboard his ship. It has been often repeated that the question whether or not a particular individual is a seaman covered by the warranty is, within reasonable bounds, a matter for the finder of fact, Longmire v. Sea Drilling Corp., 610 F.2d 1342 (CA 5).
It has been held that there is a reasonable basis for a finding that an individual is a seaman if the following test is met:
Clearly, if Burks, a member of the longshoreman's union for twenty-one years, who was engaged in the typical longshoreman's work of unloading a vessel at the time of his injury, and who has accepted LHWCA money paid him on account of that injury, is a longshoreman, then he is not entitled, since 1972, to the warranty of seaworthiness, and this action must be dismissed. Only if he can show himself to be a Jones Act Seaman rather than a longshoreman can he recover. For reasons set out below we find him to be a longshoreman vis-a-vis the defendant and dismiss his suit.
We pretermit consideration of the question whether Burks is a seaman as to the K-1 and its owner, Rogers. Whatever his status vis-a-vis Rogers, as to ARTCO and the ART-402, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Burks v. American River Transp. Co., 80-3261
...tried without a jury, and the District Court entered judgment dismissing both the Jones Act claim and the unseaworthiness claim. 486 F.Supp. 603 (M.D.La.1980). As to the Jones Act claim, the Court held that Burks had failed to prove ARTCO was guilty of any negligence. The Court also conclud......
-
Gonzalez v. Bolger
... ... William F. BOLGER, Defendant ... Civ. A. No. 78-2226 ... United States District ... Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 411 F.2d 998 (5th Cir ... ...