Halvorsen v. United States
| Decision Date | 29 September 1922 |
| Docket Number | 6679. |
| Citation | 284 F. 285 |
| Parties | HALVORSEN v. UNITED STATES et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington |
The libelant was employed as first assistant engineer on the steamship Higho at the port of Baltimore, February 16, 1921 for a voyage to South American and other ports and back to the home port for a period not exceeding 12 months. On the 28th of May following, at the port of Rio de Janiero, without his fault, he became ill and was placed in a hospital, where he remained until June 21st following. After discharge by the hospital, he being without funds and being informed that his wages had been left with the United States consul, he called upon the consul, who refused to pay any sum unless the libelant accepted the whole sum left by the master as payment in full for the voyage. He was obliged to sign because of his penniless condition. He was provided passage to New York by the United States consul, but was required to pay for subsistence en route. Upon arrival at New York he sought employment, and failed, and then went to the port of Baltimore and reported to the port captain operating the respondent ship. He was not given further employment, but secured another employment for a brief time, for which he received $150, but was required to pay $9.50 a week, or a total of $38, for subsistence. He has demanded his full wages for the voyage, and $5.50 per day for each day in the city of Baltimore and New York between July 11th, the day of arrival in New York, and July 20th, the day he secured employment and $5.50 per day for each day from September 1, 1921, to the date the voyage was completed, December 31, 1921, the time he had no employment, as and for the allowance due libelant for room, quarters, and meals ashore, as stipulated in the articles, and for two days' pay at the rate stipulated in the articles for each day elapsing since January 1, 1922. The respondent contends that the libelant was discharged at the port of Rio de Janiero and fully paid, and further that under no circumstances is he entitled to wages or subsistence beyond the time of his arrival at the port of Baltimore, and no justification is manifest under any view of the case for the penalty of two days' pay for each day's default in payment.
James Kiefer, of Seattle, Wash., for libelant.
Bogle Merritt & Bogle, of Seattle, Wash., for respondents.
NETERER District Judge (after stating the facts...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alier v. Sea Land Serv., Inc.
...not entitled to the double pay, penalty or compensation, as the case may be, under Title 46, United States Code, Section 596. Halvorsen v. United States, 284 F. 285, cited by Judge Roche in his Opinion, Decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Nor......
-
O'CONNOR v. Panama Canal Co.
...fault on his part. Under such circumstances, a discharge would be wholly ineffective to release the ship or its owners. Halvorsen v. United States (D. C.) 284 F. 285; Great Lakes v. Geiger (C. C. A.) 261 F. In the case of Wahler v. Alaska S. S. Co. (supra) the seaman was entitled to recover......
-
Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. Inc. v. Aderhold
...of diligence could have earned as well as for the amounts actually earned. Warren v. United States, D.C. 75 F.Supp. 836; Halvorsen v. United States, D.C., 284 F. 285. We take it that as a necessary consequence of the theory of crediting of earnings now adopted we have abandoned that portion......
-
Meyer v. Dollar SS Line
...cause, I think, appears to challenge the right to double pay under section 4529, Rev. St. (46 USCA § 596). See, also, Halvorsen v. United States (D. C.) 284 F. 285. An order may be accordingly On Rehearing. In a petition for rehearing it is made to appear that the court overlooked the alleg......