TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Coon v. Kennedy

Coon v. Kennedy, 248 U.S. 457 (1919)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
January 20, 1919
Docket
No. 398
Judges
McReynolds
Citations
248 U.S. 45739 S. Ct. 14663 L. Ed. 3581919 U.S. LEXIS 2292
Syllabus
Under Jud. Code, § 237, as amended September 6,1916, a writ oferror does not lie to a judgment of a state court holding the state Workmen’s Compensation Law inapplicable to a case of personal injuries governed by the maritime law and holding the Act of October 6, 1917, which changes the rule in that regard, inapplicable retrospectively.
Summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OP ERRORS AND APPEALS OP THE STATE OP NEW JERSEY. The cáse is stated in the opinion.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — McReynolds

Memorandum opinion by Mr. Justice McReynolds.

This writ of error runs to a judgment of the Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey filed March 11, 1918, 91 N. J. L. 598, denying relief to Rebecca Coon who *458 sued to recover under the New Jersey Workmen’s Compensation Act on. account of her husband’s death by drowning in the navigable waters of that State whik employed as a fireman on a tug boat.

The court held that as the accident occurred August 4, 1915, the Act of Congress approved October 6,1917, c. 97, 40 Stat. 395 , “saving ... to claimants the rights and remedies under the workmen’s compensation law of any State” was inapplicable, and that under the doctrine announced in Southern Pacific Co.

v. Jensen, 244 U. S. 205 , the rights of the parties depended upon the maritime law of the United States.

There was no decision against the validity of a treaty or statute of or an authority exercised under the United States, nor in favor of the validity of a statute of or an authority exercised under a State challenged because of repugnance to the Constitution, treaties or laws of the United States. Consequently, under the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, 39 Stat. 726 , the writ of error was improperly sued out and must be Dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1920: 119202026peak 1920 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Davis251 U.S. 256 (1920)

Most recent

  1. Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Davis251 U.S. 256 (1920)

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
Southern Pac. Co. v. Jensen, 244 U.S. 205 (1916) 1,019

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