Pariser v. City of New York

Decision Date03 January 1945
Docket NumberNo. 69.,69.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

146 F.2d 431 (1945)


No. 69.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

January 3, 1945.

146 F.2d 432

Ignatius M. Wilkinson, Corp. Counsel, of New York City (Herbert B. Lee, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Jacob Rassner, of New York City, for appellee.

Before SWAN, AUGUSTUS N. HAND and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiff was a deckhand on the dredge Grabit belonging to the City of New York. On April 27, 1943, when the day's dredging was done and the vessel was moored alongside the 29th Street Pier, North River, orders were given to put hooks on the larger friction wheels to keep the outside dredging bucket suspended for the night. There were two of these wheels or drums — one on the starboard and one on the port side of the covered deck. The engineer Dowding placed a hook on the starboard drum. It was the duty of the plaintiff to place another hook on the spoke of the port drum. The hook weighed about thirty-five pounds, was at the end of a short chain bolted on the deck close to the drum and was fastened to a three-quarter inch rope attached to a post running up from the deck. In placing the hook on the spoke the plaintiff had only to grasp the rope, lift the hook, put it on the spoke, move back away and the job would be done. Then the engineer on his signal would release the steam pressure which held up the bucket and the weight of the bucket suspended outside would slowly bring the spoke up snug against the hook. By this means the hook would lock the drum in position and would prevent the chain which held the bucket from being unwound, and the bucket would be held up out of the water for the night. The plaintiff testified that when he first attempted to place the hook on the spoke of the port drum it "flew off" but he backed out of the way. He then replaced it on the spoke and gave the signal to the engineer to release the steam pressure but, as soon as the steam pressure which held the bucket up was released, there was a quick jerk. He jumped to get out of the way of the wheel and hook, and, as he did this, slipped on the grease which was on the deck where he was standing next the post. The apparent effect of slipping, according to his version, was to throw his left foot into the air so that the driving rod caught it, dragging him over, and thereby caused a fracture of the fourth metatarsal bone of his left foot. He testified that the strain occasioned by the slipping on the greasy deck also produced an inguinal hernia which was something he had never had before. The defendant offered evidence indicating that the plaintiff, after giving the signal, got up on the engine bed and attempted to place the hook on the spoke at a time when the engine was revolving, thus seeking to negative plaintiff's testimony that his injuries arose from slipping on the greasy deck. Which version of the accident was correct was a question for the jury.

According to the plaintiff's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • Weiss v. Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, 331
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 26 June 1956
    ...status as seamen is less clear than that of Weiss here have been permitted to recover under the Jones Act. See Pariser v. City of New York, 2 Cir., 146 F.2d 431; McKie v. Diamond Marine Co., 5 Cir., 204 F.2d 132; Gianfala v. Texas Co., 350 U.S. 879, reversing Texas Co. v. Gianfala, 5 Cir., ......
  • Ortiz v. New York City Housing Authority, 93-CV-4461 (FB).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • 19 October 1998
    ...and such court exceeds its duty when it becomes an advocate and asks improper questions." Id. at 385 (quoting Pariser v. City of New York, 146 F.2d 431, 433 (2d The Court did indeed ask questions of these two witnesses regarding their observations of criminal activity in the Cypress Hills p......
  • Brinegar v. San Ore Construction Company, PB 68 C-68.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States State District Court of Eastern District of Arkansas
    • 25 June 1969
    ...a steam derrick incapable of self-propulsion, which capsized while being towed. The same result was reached in Pariser v. City of N.Y., 146 F.2d 431 (2d Cir.1943) and in Chesser v. General Dredging Co., 150 F.Supp. 592 302 F. Supp. 639 (S.D.Fla.1957). The Second Circuit case of Tyndall v. C......
  • Hill v. Diamond, 8698
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • 31 December 1962
    ...Sand & Gravel Co., 6 Cir., 202 F.2d 383; Gahagan Const. Corporation v. Armao, 1 Cir., 165 F.2d 301; Pariser v. City of New York, 2 Cir., 146 F.2d 431; Chesser v. General Dredging Co., S.D.Fla., 150 F.Supp. 592; Early v. American Dredging Co., E.D.Pa., 101 F.Supp. 393; Melanson v. Bay State ......
  • 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