TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mahar v. Gartland S. S. Co.

Mahar v. Gartland S. S. Co., 62 F. Supp. 158 (W.D.N.Y. 1945)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, W.D. New York · Federal District Courts
Decided
July 7, 1945
Docket
No. 2123
Judges
Burke
Citations
62 F. Supp. 1581945 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1936

Opinion of the Court — Burke

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

BURKE, District Judge.

The plaintiff was emploj'-ed as a member of the crew of the vessel “Sullivan Brothers,” engaged in trade on the Great Lakes. He alleges that between August 16 and August 21, 1944, he performed services as a seaman for the agreed wage of $44.40, payment of which was refused by the defendant. His claim is that he is entitled to two days pay for each and every day for which such payment has been delayed. The claim is evidently made under Sec. 596, Title 46 U.S.C.A. Defendant moves for summary judgment in its favor with respect to all of plaintiff’s claim in excess of $44.40 and interest thereon.

Section 596 was one of the provisions contained in the Shipping Commissioners Act of June 7, 1872, c. 322, 17 Stat. 262 . Section 544 of Title 46 U.S.C.A. provides that none of the provisions of certain enumerated sections of Title 46, including Secs. 591-596, shall apply to sail or steam vessels engaged in the lake-going trade. The sections enumerated in Sec. 544 are those contained in the Shipping Commissioner’s Act and this section is to be taken as meaning that none of the provisions of the Shipping Commissioner’s Act apply to vessels in the lake-going trade. Johnson v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, D.C. 33 F.Supp. 982 . Since the plaintiff is not entitled to double wages for the period of delay in payment under Sec. 596, double wages are not recoverable under Sec. 597. The limit of recovery to which plaintiff is entitled under the claim is $44.40 with interest. Motion granted.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Johnson v. Standard Oil Co., 33 F. Supp. 982 (D. Maryland 1940) 7

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