Reskin v. Minnesota-Atlantic Transit Co., 84.
| Decision Date | 13 November 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 84.,84. |
| Parties | RESKIN v. MINNESOTA-ATLANTIC TRANSIT CO. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Brown, Ely & Richards, of Buffalo, N. Y. (Laurence E. Coffey and W. Alexander Eldridge, both of Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel), for defendant-appellant.
Desmond & Drury, of Buffalo, N. Y. (Edward J. Desmond and John E. Drury, Jr., both of Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.
Before SWAN, CHASE, and PATTERSON, Circuit Judges.
The plaintiff, a seaman on the Great Lakes, brought this suit in the District Court for the Western District of New York under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688, to recover indemnity for personal injuries received while carrying out an order given him by the mate. A trial by jury resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant has appealed. The sole question now raised is whether the denial of the defendant's motion for a directed verdict was error.
The sufficiency of the evidence as a basis for the verdict is to be tested by taking as the standard whatever facts the jury might reasonably have found which were supported by substantial evidence together with such reasonable inferences therefrom as might have been drawn. Lumbra v. United States, 290 U.S. 551, 54 S.Ct. 272, 78 L.Ed. 492; Richmond & Danville Railroad v. Powers, 149 U.S. 43, 45, 13 S.Ct. 748, 37 L.Ed. 642.
The accident happened about half past eight on the morning of November 17, 1938, on the defendant's package cargo steamer "Queen" while she was in the port of Buffalo following a voyage from Duluth. The plaintiff had shipped on her at Duluth for a return voyage. Just before the accident he was on the 'tween deck with the first mate whose orders he was bound to obey. They were near a vertical steel ladder leading up about eleven feet through a hatch to the deck above when the mate gave him an order which the jury could reasonably have found from the evidence to have been, "Harry, take those two shovels up and then come down and get the brooms". The plaintiff started up the ladder with both shovels held by their handles in one hand, using only his free hand to steady himself on the ladder. He got up some feet without mishap but when he tried to reach high enough to take hold of the hatch combing he lost his balance; fell back to the 'tween deck and injured his back. There was also testimony from which the jury was justified in finding that when the mate ordered the plaintiff to take the shovels up he intended to have him use the ladder and that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dixon v. United States
...Inc., 2 Cir., 157 F.2d 817; Masjulis v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp., 2 Cir., 31 F.2d 284; Reskin v. Minnesota-Atlantic Transit Co., 2 Cir., 107 F.2d 743; Storgard v. France & Canada S.S. Corp., 2 Cir., 263 F. 4 Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. Smith, 305 U. S. 424, 432, 59 S.......
-
Klimaszewski v. Pacific-Atlantic Steamship Co.
...A seaman does not assume that risk. Darlington v. National Bulk Carriers, Inc., 2 Cir., 1946, 157 F.2d 817; Reskin v. Minnesota-Atlantic Transit Co., 2 Cir., 1939, 107 F.2d 743; Kangadis v. United States, D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1954, 121 F.Supp. 842. To hold a longshoreman completely barred because h......
-
Vileski v. Pacific-Atlantic SS Co.
...v. United States, 2 Cir., 1942 A.M.C. 19; The Diamond Cement, 9 Cir., 95 F.2d 738, 123 F.2d 1008, 1938 A.M.C. 757; Reskin v. Minn. Atlantic Transit Co., 2 Cir., 107 F.2d 743; Fegan v. Lykes Bros. S. S. Co., Inc., 198 La. 312, 3 So.2d 632, 1941 A.M.C. 1154; Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. v. Marti......
-
In re Zawisza
... ... 1131, 103 S.Ct. 14, 73 L.Ed.2d 1401 (1982) (citing F.S. Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia, 253 U.S. 412, 40 S.Ct. 560, 64 L.Ed. 989 (1920)). The ... ...