Carlson

Carlson v. Pacific Far East Lines

Good Law
105 Cal. Rptr. 885·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 1241·29 Cal. App. 3d 883·38 Cal. Comp. Cases 69
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 1973Civ. 30507California2,321 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elkengton, J.

We are concerned here with the application of California’s rule of Witt v. Jackson, 57 Cal.2d 57, 69-73 [ 17 Cal.Rptr. 369 , 366 P.2d 641 ], to a longshoreman’s judgment for injuries sustained on a dock while engaged in loading a transoceanic vessel lying alongside.

Witt v. Jackson allows a third party tortfeasor to invoke the concurrent negligence of an employer, thus defeating the employer’s right to reimbursement for workmen’s compensation paid to an injured workman. In such a case the amount of the workman’s judgment against the third party tortfeasor will nevertheless be reduced by the amount of workmen’s compensation paid him, for otherwise he would have a “double recovery.” The rule has the effect of compelling contribution from the negligent employer toward his injured workman’s judgment against the third party, in the amount of the workmen’s compensation paid.

There is no dispute as to the evidence.

Plaintiff Clarence Carlson was a longshoreman employed by the California Stevedore and Ballast Company. While on a dock, attaching slings to cargo which was to be loaded on a vessel of defendant Pacific Far East Lines, he was struck and injured by a vehicle…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.