Erlich v. Wilhelmsen

Decision Date13 April 1942
Docket NumberNo. 2522.,2522.
Citation44 F. Supp. 414
PartiesERLICH v. WILHELMSEN et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

Haight, Griffin, Deming & Gardner, of New York City (J. Ward O'Neill, of New York City, of counsel), for defendant Barber S.S. Lines, Inc.

Hayes & Tullman, of New York City, for plaintiff.

CAMPBELL, District Judge.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff, on the law side of the Court, to recover the sum of $25,000 for injuries alleged to have been sustained by him, while employed as a watchman on board the Motorship Thermopylae.

The defendant Barber Steamship Lines, Inc., appears specially, and not generally, for this motion, which is for an order dismissing the complaint, as to it, on the ground that it appears that plaintiff and said defendant, Barber Steamship Lines, Inc., are citizens of the same State, and there is no diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and said defendant, and for that reason this Court is without jurisdiction.

It appears, from the complaint, that plaintiff is a citizen of the United States, and a resident of the State of New York, and that the Barber Steamship Lines, Inc., is a domestic corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York.

Although plaintiff definitely elected to bring his action at law, he now seeks to sustain the jurisdiction of this Court, which has been attacked by the defendant in question, under Title 28, Section 41, Subdivision 3, U.S.C.A., which reads as follows:

"§ 41, subd. (3) Admiralty causes, seizures, and prizes. Third. Of all civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, saving to suitors in all cases the right of a common-law remedy where the common law is competent to give it, and to claimants for compensation for injuries to or death of persons other than the master or members of the crew of a vessel their rights and remedies under the workmen's compensation law of any State, District, Territory, or possession of the United States, which rights and remedies when conferred by such law shall be exclusive; of all seizures on land or waters not within admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; of all prizes brought into the United States; and of all proceedings for the condemnation of property taken as prize. The jurisdiction of the district courts shall not extend to causes arising out of injuries to or death of persons other than the master or members of the crew, for which compensation is provided by the workmen's compensation law of any State,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Jansson v. Swedish American Line
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • November 6, 1950
    ...Steel Corp., 3 Cir., 1946, 152 F.2d 887; Stamp v. Union Stevedoring Corp., D.C.E.D. Pa.1925, 11 F.2d 172, 174; Erlich v. Wilhelmsen, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1942, 44 F. Supp. 414, 415. These cases, all without extensive consideration or analysis of the problem, assume that, except where the complaint i......
  • Williams v. Steamship Mut. Underwriting Ass'n, 32715
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • August 24, 1954
    ...unseaworthiness on the law side of a Federal court, the jurisdictional requisite of diversity of citizenship must exist. Erlich v. Wilhelmsen, D.C.1942, 44 F.Supp. 414; Branic v. Wheeling Steel Corp., 3 Cir., 1945, 152 F.2d 887; 4 Benedict on Admiralty (6th ed.), 1953 Supp., 40. However, as......
  • McDonald v. Cape Cod Trawling Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • May 13, 1947
    ...and arising between parties of diverse state citizenship. Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Berg, 3 Cir., 274 F. 534, 539; Erlich v. Wilhelmsen, D.C., E.D.N. Y., 44 F.Supp. 414; Stamp v. Union Stevedoring Corp., D.C., E.D.Pa., 11 F.2d 172, 174. She cannot make either showing. Diversity of citizen......
  • Shelton v. Seas Shipping Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • September 11, 1947
    ...U.S. 638, 42 S.Ct. 50, 66 L.Ed. 410. See also Stamp v. Union Stevedoring Corp., D.C., E.D. Pa., 11 F.2d 172, 173 and Erlich v. Wilhelmsen, D.C., E.D.N.Y., 44 F.Supp. 414. Under the general maritime law there was no right of recovery for wrongful death caused by negligence. The Harrisburg, 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT