Knapp v. Banta
| Decision Date | 29 June 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 14499.,14499. |
| Citation | 333 F.2d 746 |
| Parties | Gordon C. KNAPP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. W. BANTA, Burton Banta, Frank Banta and Plaquemine Towing Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Robert L. Lansden, Lansden & Lansden, Cairo, Ill., for appellant.
Francis D. Conner, John M. Ferguson, East St. Louis, Ill., Wagner, Conner, Ferguson, Bertrand & Baker, East St. Louis, Ill., of counsel, for appellees.
Before KNOCH, KILEY and SWYGERT, Circuit Judges.
This is a tort action removed because of diversity to the district court. Plaintiff Gordon C. Knapp, a labor organizer for the National Maritime Union, sought to recover damages from defendants J. W. Banta, Burton Banta, Frank Banta, and Plaquemine Towing Corporation for alleged assault, conspiracy to assault, negligence, and willful and wanton conduct which resulted in plaintiff being shot in the arm. The district court, sitting without a jury, ruled that plaintiff failed to prove his charges and that he was guilty of contributory negligence. Plaintiff appeals.
The principal issue is whether the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are erroneous.
The facts found by the district court are summarized as follows. Plaintiff three days before the shooting occurred went to the Peddie Barge Landing on the Ohio River near Cairo, Illinois, and boarded the Kishwaukee, a motor vessel belonging to defendants and skippered by Burton Banta, to discuss union organization with the crew.
Banta ordered plaintiff and the crew off the boat. Plaintiff left the vessel but remained on one of the barges brought in to the landing by the Kishwaukee. Banta followed plaintiff on to the barge with a butcher knife in an effort to make him leave.
The captain chased Knapp around the barge but plaintiff avoided him, aping and mimicking him. Banta reboarded the tug and attempted to unlash it from the landing. Plaintiff prevented him by whipping the end of the line in his face when he attempted to loosen the line.
The next morning plaintiff established a picket line on the shore adjacent to the landing. Banta went ashore under police escort and returned with three men and the escort. The Kishwaukee was removed from the landing.
Three days later the Kishwaukee with another tug and four barges returned to the landing. The picket line moved out on to the barges to prevent the crews on the vessels from removing the barges previously docked by the Kishwaukee. There were about thirty men picketing on the barges, some carrying clubs or iron pipes about eighteen inches in length (called "toothpicks").
As the vessels approached the men on the barges, J. W. Banta called out that they were going to pick up their...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PAINTERS DIST. COUN. NO. 38, ETC. v. Edgewood Contracting Co.
...v. East Bay Union of Machinists, 344 F.2d 300 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 826, 86 S.Ct. 61, 15 L.Ed.2d 71 (1965); Knapp v. Banta, 333 F.2d 746 (7th Cir. 1964); Purvis v. Great Falls Building and Construction Trades Council, 266 F.Supp. 661 (D.Mont.1967).7 Though there is reference in......
-
Construction & Gen. Lab. Loc. U. No. 438 v. Hardy Eng. & Const. Co.
...by the evidence. James v. United States, 252 F.2d 687 (5th Cir. 1958); Shepherd v. Mahannah, 220 F.2d 737 (5th Cir. 1955); Knapp v. Banta, 333 F.2d 746 (7th Cir. 1964); Homestake Mining Co. v. Midcontinent Exploration Co., 282 F.2d 787 (10th Cir. 1960). That the court below could have reach......
- Coleman v. Kidney, 15273.