Sellers

Sellers v. United States Lines Co.

Good Law
89 F. Supp. 254·1949 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1850
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 8, 1949No. 24543-S-LCalifornia967 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Lemmon, J.

The libelant knew when he left the ship on August 2d that the loading was about completed. He had just come off two watches which ran from 4 p. m. on August 1st to 8 a. m. on August 2d. It was his dutjT while on these watches to take the temperatures. In doing this he was required to go down in the hold and he must have observed that the loading operations were about completed on the morning of the 2d, as the ship’s log definitely shows. He states that he had permission from cither the Chief Engineer or Assistant Engineer to leave the boat and not return until his regular watch of 4 o’clock on the afternoon of the 3d. This is denied by the Assistant Engineer and it appears from the Captain’s testimony that, though the crew members exchanged watches, this was an irregular procedure and permission should have been obtained for that purpose. The Assistant Engineer does say that he permitted Sellers to make the exchange but does not tell on what date he gave permission. He does state definitely that he told Sellers that he would be obliged to keep in touch with the ship’s sailing time. This Sellers could easily have done. Fie himself admits that he stayed in a hotel within sight of…

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.