Flores

Flores v. Pac. Island Transp. Lines

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 1693·248 Cal. App. 2d 812·57 Cal. Rptr. 73·32 Cal. Comp. Cases 548
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 1967Civ. No. 30728California2,893 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fourt, J.

This action was instituted by longshoreman Arthur Flores (hereinafter called Flores) against ship’s owner Thor-Dahl A/S (hereinafter called Thor-Dahl) for damages for personal injuries suffered when, in the course of his employment by Crescent Wharf & Warehouse Company (hereinafter called Crescent), Flores was engaged in unloading the vessel Thorsisle. Thor-Dahl filed a cross-complaint for indemnity against Crescent and the jury returned a verdict of $78,850 in favor of Flores but denied indemnity to ThorDahl; judgment was entered accordingly. Because the accident was sustained by a longshoreman aboard a seagoing vessel, this action is controlled by federal maritime law in both its substantive and its procedural aspects. (Vittone v. American President Lines, 228 Cal.App.2d 689, 693 [ 39 Cal. Rptr. 758 ] ; Kermarec v. Compagnie Generate Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625 [ 3 L.Ed.2d 550 . 79 S.Ct. 406 ]; Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn, 346 U.S. 406, 409 [ 98 L.Ed. 143 , 74 S.Ct. 202 ].)

Appellant Thor-Dahl contends that the jury was improperly instructed concerning the nature and extent of Crescent’s duty as a stevedore company under contract to unload Thorsisle with respect to its…

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.