Dugas v. NATIONAL AIRCRAFT CORPORATION
| Decision Date | 30 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 40748,40749. |
| Parties | Xavier Maxime DUGAS, Admr. of the Estate of Kathryn Cecile Dugas, Deceased v. NATIONAL AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and James Hart, Admr. C.T.A. of the Estate of Theodore H. Hart a/k/a Theodore Henry Hart, III, Deceased. Betty R. GUISINGER, Admx. of the Estate of Christina M. Hart, Deceased v. NATIONAL AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and James Hart, Admr. C.T.A. of the Estate of Theodore H. Hart a/k/a Theodore Henry Hart, III, Deceased. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Freedman, Borowsky & Lorry, Milton M. Borowsky, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Montgomery McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, Sidney L. Wickenhaver, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants.
Defendant has moved for judgment on the pleadings in these two civil actions. Briefly stated, both actions arise from an event, which occurred on December 29, 1965 when an aircraft, owned by National Aircraft Corporation and piloted by Theodore H. Hart, disappeared after it departed from South Caicos Island, in the Bahamas, in a southeasterly direction toward Puerto Rico, its intended destination. The passengers in the Piper aircraft were Christina M. Hart, the pilot's daughter, and her friend Kathryn Cecile Dugas. The aircraft was never seen nor heard from again.
The parties agree that the fatal injuries were sustained in international waters and that the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 761 et seq. applies. Plaintiff agrees, moreover, that defendant's motion to transfer these cases to the Admiralty side of the Court is well taken.
The only issue remaining for our decision is whether: (1) the remedy provided by the Death on the High Seas Act is exclusive or, (2) does the Pennsylvania Survival Act1 augment the Death on the High Seas Act, and so permit the plaintiffs to recover damages beyond the pecuniary loss provided for by the Death on the High Seas Act.
We conclude that the latter Act was intended to give a federally-recognized, uniform right to surviving dependents to recover for wrongful death on the high seas, where no such right theretofore existed in the maritime law or admiralty jurisdiction. The federal Act supplanted all state wrongful death statutes governing claims for wrongful death where the death occurred in international waters. However, the federal Act does not preclude or supersede state survival statutes, which exist independently of any state wrongful death statute.2 Admiralty jurisdiction recognizes and preserves existing state rights unaffected by federal law. Petition of Gulf Oil Corporation, 172 F.Supp. 911, 916 (S.D.N.Y.1959); Safir v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 241 F.Supp. 501, 504-505 (E.D.N.Y.1965).
The need for uniformity is not subverted because the survival act to be applied will be the law of the tortfeasor's residence. United States v. S. S. Washington, (E.D.Va.1959) aff'd. on the opinion below sub. nom. United States v. Texas Co., 272 F.2d 711 (4 Cir. 1959). The equitable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dugas v. National Aircraft Corporation
...in admiralty under the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C. § 761 et seq., was not the exclusive basis of recovery in this case, 300 F.Supp. 1167. Since it was admitted by plaintiffs and defendants that the plane crashed in international waters, Judge Kraft held that the survival statute o......
-
Telek ex rel. Telek v. Domestic Tankers, Inc., Civil No. 78/241
...the Court (law or admiralty) as the rights of the estate. Indeed, there is authority tothe contrary. See, e.g., Dugas v. National Aircraft Corp., 300 F.Supp. 1167 (E.D. Pa. 1969) (survival action under state statute joined with action under the Death on the High Seas Act). [3] Where claims ......