From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Welsh v. Utah Dredging Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Nov 15, 1968
403 F.2d 217 (3d Cir. 1968)

Opinion

No. 16694.

Argued October 24, 1968.

Decided November 15, 1968.

Avram G. Adler, Freedman, Borowsky Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

W. Glenn George, Harper, George, Buchanan Driver, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees.

Before HASTIE, Chief Judge, and SEITZ and ALDISERT, Circuit Judges.


OPINION OF THE COURT


This appeal has been taken from an order granting the defendant-appellee's motion for a directed verdict upon the completion of all the testimony. The action was brought under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688, and the maritime law by the plaintiff against his alleged employers for injuries suffered while employed as a leverman on the dredge "Alameda", then operating in the waters of Osaka Bay, Japan.

The District Court found and this court agrees that the trial record conclusively established that neither defendant was the plaintiff's employer. The evidence, including the employment contract, required the conclusion that the defendants were not in control of the "Alameda" at the time of the accident and that a different company was the plaintiff's employer.

The facts in the present case do not leave room for a contrary conclusion as was the case in Trent v. Atlantic City Electric Co., 3d Cir. 1964, 334 F.2d 847.

The judgment will be affirmed.


Summaries of

Welsh v. Utah Dredging Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Nov 15, 1968
403 F.2d 217 (3d Cir. 1968)
Case details for

Welsh v. Utah Dredging Co.

Case Details

Full title:John Patrick WELSH, Jr., Appellant, v. UTAH DREDGING CO. and Utah…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Nov 15, 1968

Citations

403 F.2d 217 (3d Cir. 1968)

Citing Cases

Haskins v. Point Towing Co.

In view of the foregoing evidence (particularly Exhibits A, B and G), we can find no reversible error in the…

Evans v. United Arab Shipping Co. S.A.G.

The question of whether a defendant is an employer for the purposes of the Jones Act is normally a factual…