TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Gonsalves v. Moose Dry Dock & Repair Co.

Gonsalves v. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Company

Gonsalves v. Moose Dry Dock & Repair Co., 266 U.S. 171 (1924)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
November 17, 1924
Docket
No. 3
Judges
McReynolds
Citations
266 U.S. 17145 S. Ct. 3969 L. Ed. 2281924 U.S. LEXIS 2905

Opinion — McReynolds

*172 Mr. Justice McReynolds delivered the opinion of the Court.

Proceeding in admiralty appellant sought to recover damages for personal injuries received while he was employed by respondent and engaged in repairing the steamer “ Starmount.” Upon motion the trial court dismissed the libel, holding that it had no jurisdiction of the cause.

The libel alleges that respondent had charge of the work of repairing the shell plates of the steamer, then resting in a floating dock at Twenty-seventh Street, Brooklyn; that while employed by respondent and working oh board appellant suffered injuries through the explosion of a blau torch which the employer negligently permitted to be out of repair. The prayer was for monition according to the course and practice in admiralty and for damages.

Since the decree below (June 14,1921) we have decided Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.

v. Kierejewski, 261 U. S. 479 . The opinion there controls this cause unless the injuries sustained by appellant were not the result of tort, committed and effective, on navigable waters. In The Robert W. Parsons, 191 U. S. 17, 33 , this Court hold that repairs to a vessel while in an ordinary dry dock were not made on land.

The Steamship Jefferson, 215 U. S. 130 . Here repairs were made upon the ship while supported by a structure floating on navigable waters. Clearly, the accident did not occur upon land. The doctrine followed in Cope v. Vallette Dry Dock Co., 119 U. S. 625, 627 , that “ no structure that is not a ship or vessel is a subject of salvage,” has no application. That admiralty jurisdiction in tort matters depends upon locality is settled.

The judgment below must be reversed.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 52 cases

View all citing references →
1925: 21926: 51927: 41928: 51929: 21930: 21933: 41935: 11936: 31937: 11940: 11942: 11943: 11948: 21949: 11950: 11954: 11956: 11958: 21961: 11962: 11963: 21968: 11974: 21992: 11994: 11996: 11998: 12018: 119252026peak 1926 · 5

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
The Robert W. Parsons, 191 U.S. 17 (1903) 134
Cope v. Vallette Dry Dock Co., 119 U.S. 625 (1887) 117
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Kierejewski, 261 U.S. 479 (1923) 82
The S.S. Jefferson, 215 U.S. 130 (1909) 67

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list