Pacific Inland Navigation Company, a Corporation v. Delbert A. Course

368 F.2d 540 PACIFIC INLAND NAVIGATION COMPANY, a corporation, Appellant, v. Delbert A. COURSE, Appellee. No. 21080. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Oct. 26, 1966. Floyd A. Fredrickson, Eugene D. Cox, of Gray, Fredrickson & Heath, Portland, Or., for appellant. Burl L. Green, Allen T. Murphy Jr., of Green, Richardson, Griswold & Murphy, Portland, Or., for appellee. Thomas J. White, William F. White, of White, Sutherland & Gilbertson, Portland, Or., amici curiae Columbia River Towboat Ass'n. Before MERRILL and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges, and MATHES, District judge. MERRILL, Circuit Judge. 1 This appeal presents the question whether a shipowner which operates its own repair yard can be held liable to its employee harbor worker for shipboard injury resulting from unseaworthiness of the vessel. 1 The worker was covered by the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 2 and appellant contends that 905 of that Act precludes recovery. 3 The District Court held otherwise, relying on Reed v. The Yaka, 373 U.S. 410 , 83 S.Ct. 1349 , 10 L.Ed.2d 448 (1962). 2 Appellant seeks to distinguish that case, asserting that there the employer, holding a bareboat…

This appeal presents the question whether a shipowner which operates its own repair yard can be held liable to its employee harbor worker for shipboard injury resulting from unseaworthiness of the vessel. 1 The worker was covered by the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 2 and appellant contends that § 905 of that Act precludes recovery. 3 The District Court held otherwise, relying on Reed v. The Yaka, 373 U.S. 410 , 83 S.Ct. 1349 , 10 L.Ed.2d 448 (1962).

Appellant seeks to distinguish that case, asserting that there the employer, holding a bareboat charter from the shipowner, was obligated under the charter agreement to make the owner whole for damages resulting from an unseaworthy condition caused by the charterer. Appellant thus likens that case to Ryan Stevedoring Company v. Pan-Atlantic S.S. Corp., 350 U.S. 124 , 76 S.Ct. 232 , 100 L.Ed. 133 (1956). In Ryan the imposition on the employer of the economic burden of its employee’s recovery for unseaworthiness was allowed *542 notwithstanding the provisions of § 905. This result, however, was justified upon the ground that by its warranty to the shipowner the employer took upon itself not only its own limited…

(concurring specially).

I concur in the result; but do so only because Reed v. S.S. Yaka, 373 U.S. 410 , 83 S.Ct. 1349 , 10 L.Ed.2d 448 (1963), as I understand it, ex necessitate reads § 5 out of the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act [ 33 U.S.C. § 905 ], as applied to the ease at bar.