Citation network
Chandris, Inc. Vs. Latsis
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 14, 1995
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 347 (1995) October Term, 1994 Syllabus Chandris, Inc., Et Al. V. LatsisSearch
-
required for seaman status under the Jones Act, McDermott Int'l, Inc. v. WilanderSearch
-
Swanson v. MarraSearch
-
s mission, would be a seaman for injuries incurred during that voyage-conflicts with this status-based inquiry. Desper v. StarvedSearch
-
Rock Ferry Co., 342 U. S. 187 , 190, and Grimes v. RaymondSearch
-
to the vessel or performance of a substantial part of his work on the vessel), which was derived from Offshore Co. v. RobisonSearch
-
see also Cortes v. BaltimoreSearch
-
see, e. g., Berkemer v. McCartySearch
-
Taylor v. FreelandSearch
-
Harden v. GordonSearch
-
U. S., at 354 (quoting Seas Shipping Co. v. SierackiSearch
-
term to have its established meaning under the general maritime law at the time the Jones Act was enacted. See Warner v. GoltraSearch
-
Id., at 157. Similarly, in Norton v. WarnerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Brown v. ITTSearch
-
Johnson v. JohnSearch
-
Our early Jones Act decisions had not recognized this fundamental distinction. In International Stevedoring Co. v. HavertySearch
-
ibid. (citing Atlantic Transport Co. of W Va. v. ImbrovekSearch
-
that land-based maritime workers should not be entitled to the seamen's traditional remedies. Our decision in Swanson v. MarraSearch
-
See also South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. BassettSearch
-
they are injured in the service of a vessel, regardless of whether the injury occurs on or off the ship. In O'Donnell v. GreatSearch
-
U. S., at 7-8. See also Braen v. PfeiferSearch
-
a). Thus, in Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. PeriniSearch
-
of the Hudson River, id., at 300, n. 4, could be compensated under the LHWCA, id., at 324. See also Parker v. MotorSearch
-
a seaman's work at the time of the injury. Seaman status is not coextensive with seamen's risks. See, e. g., Easley v. SouthernSearch
-
O'Donnell, supra, at 42-43. Desper v. StarvedSearch
-
at the time of injury. Similarly, despite Justice Harlan's suggestion in dissent that the Court's decision in Grimes v. RaymondSearch
-
cases which emphasized that the question of seaman status is normally for the factfinder to decide, see, e. g., Senko v. LaCrosseSearch
-
status as a member of the vessel' for it is seamen, not others who may work on 363 the vessel (Swanson v. MarraSearch
-
or arbitrary as to permit a worker to walk into and out of coverage in the course of his regular duties.''' Barrett v. ChevronSearch
-
U. S. A., Inc., 781 F.2d 1067 , 1075 (CA5 1986) (en bane) (quoting Longmire v. SeaSearch
-
Jones Act coverage and other remedies depending on the activity in which the worker was engaged while injured. Reeves v. MobileSearch
-
employee must work only on board a vessel to qualify as a seaman under the Jones Act. In Southwest Marine, Inc. v. GizoniSearch
-
for the First Circuit was apparently the first to develop a generally applicable test for seaman status. In Carumbo v. CapeSearch
-
Act, courts accepted the Carumbo formulation of master or member of a crew in the Jones Act context. See Boyd v. FordSearch
-
Estate of Wenzel v. SeawardSearch
-
Whittington v. SewerSearch
-
Griffith v. WheelingSearch
-
McKie v. DiamondSearch
-
in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has a substantial Jones Act caseload, in the wake of Offshore Co. v. RobisonSearch
-
of vessels, a finite group of vessels under common ownership or control. Braniff v. JacksonSearch
-
Bertrand v. InternationalSearch
-
Miller v. Patton-TullySearch
-
Caruso v. SterlingSearch
-
Bennett v. PeriniSearch
-
in the Fifth Circuit's Jones Act jurisprudence added a strictly temporal gloss to the Jones Act inquiry. Under Barrett v. ChevronSearch
-
to find seaman status where the employee spent less than 30 percent of his time aboard ship. See, e. g., Palmer v. FayardSearch
-
Lormand v. SuperiorSearch
-
cf. Leonard v. DixieSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial