North Alaska Salmon Co. v. Larsen

• Decision Date: 01 February 1915
• Docket Number: 2445.
• Citation: 220 F. 93
• Parties: NORTH ALASKA SALMON CO. v. LARSEN.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

220 F. 93

NORTH ALASKA SALMON CO. v. LARSEN.

No. 2445.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

February 1, 1915

D Freidenrich, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.

F. R Wall and I. F. Chapman, both of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and WOLVERTON, District Judge.

GILBERT Circuit Judge.

The appellee shipped as a seaman on the Olympic for a voyage from San Francisco to the appellant's salmon cannery at Locanock, Alaska, and return. On July 12, 1912, while in that employment and working on a lighter which was alongside the appellant's dock, engaged in throwing fish into a bucket to be hoisted up to the wharf, he sustained an injury to his knee. In his libel he alleged that the appellant failed and neglected to furnish him with proper medical and surgical care and attention, and compelled him to work on board the Olympic after he was injured, that he did not and could not receive proper medical care at Locanock, and that he could and should have been sent by the appellant to Naknek, or to Koggiung, or to Dutch Harbor, where he could have received proper medical and surgical care and attention. Upon the evidence, the court below found that the appellant was negligent as alleged, and decreed that it pay the appellee $506, together with interest on said sum from December 21 1912, the date of the filing of the libel, and the appellee's costs.

We find no merit in the contention that the cause of suit is not within the admiralty jurisdiction of the court, in that the appellee's contract for service as a seaman, fisherman, beachman, trapman, 'and such other services as might be required' by the appellant's superintendent, was not a maritime contract. In The Minna (D.C.) 11 F. 759, the libelant was employed solely as a fisherman, and took no part in the navigation of the vessel, which went out every morning to the fishing grounds; the libelant sleeping ashore. It was held that he was entitled to proceed against the vessel for the recovery of his wages. Judge Brown said:

'All hands employed upon a vessel, except the master, are entitled to a lien if their services are in furtherance of the main object of the enterprise in which she is engaged. * * * I do not regard the fact that libelant slept upon shore at night, and there reeled out and mended the nets, as qualifying in any way the nature of his contract. These services were merely incidental and subsidiary to his main contract.'

In Alaska Packers' Ass'n v. Domenico, 117 F. 99, 54 C.C.A. 485, this court affirmed the jurisdiction in admiralty of a contract made by men who acted as seamen on a voyage to and from salmon fishing grounds in Alaska to work as fishermen during the season, and assist in canning fish on shore, and in loading them on board for transportation, notwithstanding that the men while engaged in fishing slept on shore, and mended their nets and cared for the fish on shore. See, also, The Virginia Belle (D.C.) 204 F. 692; McRae v. Bowers Dredging Co. (C.C.) 86 F. 344; Disbrow v. The Walsh Brothers (D.C.) 36 F. 607.

It is contended that the finding of the court below that the appellant did not furnish the appellee with proper care and attention is not sustained by the evidence, and the appellant relies upon the fact that it had in its employment a regularly licensed physician at Locanock, who attended the appellee, and it contends that thereby it discharged its full duty to him. The testimony was all taken in open court, with the exception of one deposition taken on behalf of the appellee. We must therefore accord to the finding of the court conclusive effect, unless there is absence of evidence to sustain it. There was evidence that after the appellee was injured he was sent to the bunk house, where his knee was painted with iodine by the doctor who was in the appellant's employment. The doctor was of the opinion that...