Chelentis v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.

Citations

• 247 U.S. 372
• 38 S. Ct. 501
• 62 L. Ed. 1171
• 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1920

Syllabus

<p>By the general maritime law, the vessel owner is liable only for the maintenance, cure and wages of a seaman injured in the service of liis ship, bv the negligence of a member of the crew, whether a superior officer or not; and this liability is not subject to be enlarged to full common-law indemnity by the law of a State. Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 244 U. S. 205. So held, in a case brought in a state court of New York, and removed to the District Court, to recover full, common-law damages from a Delaware owner for injuries received at Sea on a voyage to New York.</p> <p>Section 20 of the Seamen’s Act of March 4,1915, c. 153, 38 Stat. 1185, declaring “seamen having command shall not be held to be fellow-servants with those under their authority,” was not intended to substitute the common-law measure of liability for the maritime rule in such cases.</p> <p>The Judiciary Act of 1789, § 9, giving exclusive original admiralty and maritime jurisdiction to the District Courts, saves “to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it.” Held, that this, recognizing the fundamental distinction between rights and remedies, allows a right sanctioned by maritime law to be enforced through an appropriate common-law remedy, but does not give a plaintiff his election to have the defendant’s liability measured by common-law standards instead of those prescribed by the maritime law.</p>