Perez v. Suwanee Steamship Co., 59
| Decision Date | 10 December 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 59,Docket 24005.,59 |
| Parties | Jose A. PEREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee, v. SUWANEE STEAMSHIP CO., and Orion Shipping & Trading Co., Inc., Defendants-Appellees-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Henry Isaacson, New York City, Walter J. Klein, New York City, for plaintiff.
Allan A. Baillie, Nelson, Healy, Baillie & Burke, New York City, Richard T. O'Connell, New York City, of counsel, for defendant.
Before HAND, MEDINA and LUMBARD, Circuit Judges.
Even though we assume that, because of the plaintiff's obviously disturbed mental state, the master should have done more than merely to take away his glasses and send him below, Reck v. Pacific-Atlantic S.S. Co., 2 Cir., 180 F.2d 866, there is no evidence that except for the cut of his wrist he suffered any injury from this neglect. The cut was indeed an injury for which the ship is liable: but of it Judge Walsh said that We are therefore disposed to treat the cut as a case of de minimis, and for that reason we affirm the judgment on the first and second claims for relief.
The third claim is for maintenance and cure, and we agree that it would have been altogether unwarranted to hold that the plaintiff's failure to disclose his mental condition at the time he shipped aboard should disable him from recovery. Lindquist v. Dilkes, 3 Cir., 127 F.2d 21; Tawada v. United States, 9 Cir., 162 F.2d 615; and Ahmed v. United States, 2 Cir., 177 F.2d 898. We cannot, however, agree with the refusal to deduct from the award the wages earned by the plaintiff as dishwasher during the period of his incapacity. In Wilson v. United States, 229 F.2d 277, 281, we held that when "a seaman can and does obtain part-time work sufficiently similar to his regular employment, he must show some reason why he has not secured such employment for the entire convalescence period." That obviously presupposed that any wages earned during such employment were to be deducted; and in the case at bar, although it may be argued that dishwashing was not "sufficiently similar" to the work of a seaman to be counted, it is answer enough that the plaintiff accepted the job. The remedy of maintenance is to put the seaman in as good a position as to board and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vaughan v. Atkinson, 92-6075
...the damages payable by the promisor. And the Court of Appeals, following Wilson v. United States, 229 F.2d 277, and Perez v. Suwanee S.S. Co., 239 F.2d 180, from the Second Circuit, held that a seaman has the duty to mitigate damages and that since 'the purpose of maintenance and cure is to......
-
Gypsum Carrier, Inc. v. Handelsman
...reversing 291 F.2d 813 (4th Cir. 1961), and disapproving Wilson v. United States, 229 F.2d 277 (2d Cir. 1956), and Perez v. Suwanee S.S. Co., 239 F.2d 180 (2d Cir. 1956). But see Yates v. Dann, 223 F.2d 64, 67 (3d Cir. 1955). 42 Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor, 303 U.S. 525, 528, 58 S.Ct. 651, ......
-
Petition of United States
...of 80 degrees and, in some instances, superficial rope burns or barnacle scratches. The United States relies upon Perez v. Suwanee S. S. Co., 239 F.2d 180 (2 Cir., 1956), relating to an inconsequential injury; Brown v. Potomac Electric Power Co., 236 F.Supp. 815, 819-820 (D.D.C., 1964), inv......
-
McMillan v. Tug Jane A. Bouchard
...223 F.2d 64, 67) is preferable to that of the Second Circuit as expressed in Wilson v. United States, 229 F.2d 277 and Perez v. Suwanee S.S. Co., 239 F.2d 180, supra, and to that of the Fourth Circuit in this Id. at 532, 82 S.Ct. at 1000 (emphasis added). Since Vaughan, however, the federal......