Ribitzki

Ribitzki v. Canmar Reading & Bates, Ltd. Partnership

Good Law
111 F.3d 658·97 Daily Journal DAR 4812·1997 WL 174855·1997 A.M.C. 1841·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6769
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 14, 1997No. 96-35039California3,741 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thompson, J.

Anton Ribitzki, a seaman employed by Pi-quniq Service Company, Inc., alleged he was injured when he slipped or stepped into an *661 open hatch while cleaning an area of the CANMAR SSDC (“the Canmar”), a drill ship. Ribitzki brought suit in the district court for damages arising from his personal injuries. The district court granted partial summary judgment, rejecting Ribitzki’s claims for negligence under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688 , and unseaworthiness under admiralty law. The district court subsequently dismissed Ribitzki’s remaining claims with prejudice, and entered final judgment in favor of the defendants-appellees.

Ribitzki appeals the district court’s summary judgment.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse.

I

FACTS

Piquniq dispatched Ribitzki, a 48-year-old seaman, to work in the pit room of the Canmar, an oil drilling ship. The pit room contains five shale shakers used to clean drilling mud lubricant for reuse in the drilling process. The shale shakers remove shale fragments from the mud lubricant. The shakers then dump the fragments into a shale pit, which is also located in the pit room.

A hatch, two-feet by two-feet, is located in the…

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.