Turcich v. Liberty Corporation, 11317.

Decision Date10 December 1954
Docket NumberNo. 11317.,11317.
Citation217 F.2d 495
PartiesMary TURCICH, Administratrix of the Estate of John Zvanja, Deceased, v. The LIBERTY CORPORATION. In re ZVANJA'S ESTATE.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Charles Lakatos, Philadelphia, Pa. (Abraham E. Freedman, Joseph Weiner, Freedman, Landy & Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Thomas E. Comber, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa. (Augustus S. Ballard, Philadelphia, Pa., Pepper, Bodine, Frick, Scheetz & Hamilton, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, STALEY and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the defendant in an action for wrongful death under the Jones Act, 46 U.S. C.A. § 688, brought by the personal representative of a deceased seaman on behalf of dependent relatives. The action was tried by the district court and a jury. After the jury returned its verdict for the defendant the plaintiff moved for a new trial. After hearing the motion, it was denied for the reasons set forth in Turcich v. Liberty Corp., D.C.E.D.Pa.1954, 119 F.Supp. 7.

In this appeal plaintiff contends, inter alia, that the court's charge, taken as a whole, predicates liability for unseaworthiness on a showing of negligence. Plaintiff's second point is that by analogy to those cases under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S. C.A. § 51 et seq., in which recovery for the death of railroad workers has been predicated upon a nonnegligent breach of the federal Safety Appliances Statutes, 45 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., this Court should allow recovery under the Jones Act for the death of a seaman resulting from a nonnegligent breach of the duty to have a seaworthy vessel. Counsel for plaintiff frankly admits that there is no direct authority for his second proposition and that there is dicta to the contrary as in Lindgren v. United States, 1930, 281 U.S. 38, 50 S.Ct. 207, 74 L.Ed. 686; Kunschman v. United States, 2 Cir., 1932, 54 F.2d 987. We think that his proposition is highly interesting but we do not think that the question is reached in the instant case.

Our examination of the court's charge, the pertinent parts of which may be found in Turcich v. Liberty Corp., supra, leads us to the conclusion that no error was committed of which the plaintiff can complain. Indeed, at one point, it seems to adopt the very proposition now contended for yet the jury's verdict was for the defendant. We have examined pla...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Dixon v. Grace Lines, Inc.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • August 17, 1972
    ...the general maritime law makes the owner liable for such losses. (Turcich v. Liberty Corp., 119 F.Supp. 7, 11 (E.D.Pa.1954), aff'd 217 F.2d 495 (3rd Cir. 1954), cert. denied 350 U.S. 983, 76 S.Ct. 470, 100 L.Ed. 851 (1956).) The duty to provide a seaworthy vessel includes furnishing a seama......
  • Bartholomew v. Universe Tankships, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • January 9, 1959
    ...be allowed to overcome the salutary rule of the Baltimore case. 12 An alternative possibility suggested by Turcich v. Liberty Corp., 3 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 495, 496 should be 13 I am aware that a problem of the applicability of the three-year statute of limitations on the Jones Act count fo......
  • Burns v. Marine Transport Lines, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • July 9, 1962
    ...unnecessarily in terms of general principles, gives Fall's widow and administratrix no right of action."); cf. Turcich v. Liberty Corp., 217 F.2d 495 (3 Cir. 1954), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 983, 76 S.Ct. 470, 100 L.Ed. 851 (1956). 14 Judge Learned Hand has expressed doubt whether Lindgren wou......
  • Fall v. Esso Standard Oil Company
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • February 22, 1962
    ...the concurring opinion of Judge Lumbard in Bartholomew v. Universe Tankships, Inc., 2 Cir., 1959, 263 F.2d 437, 448; Turcich v. Liberty Corp., 3 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 495. The continuous expansion of basic principles in the rapidly developing field of maritime injuries suggests the desirabil......
  • 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