Ira S. Bushey & Sons, Inc. v. U.S.: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|subject=Business Associations | |subject=Business Associations | ||
|appealed_from= | |appealed_from= | ||
|overturned= | |||
|partially_overturned= | |||
|reaffirmed= | |||
|questioned= | |||
|criticized= | |||
|distinguished= | |||
|cited= | |||
|followed= | |||
|related= | |||
|facts=Bushy owned dry docks upon which US Coast Guard Vessel Tamaroa was dry docked for repairs. Just after midnight on the night in question, a drunk seaman Lane entered the docks and turned valves to flood the tanks on one side of the dock. The dock w/ ship listed to the side, and the ship slid off the dock, colliding with a wall, then partially sunk. | |||
|procedural_history= | |||
|issues=Is the US responsible for the actions its employee took? | |||
|arguments= | |||
|holding=Yes. | |||
|judgment= | |||
|reasons=Occurrence was more related to occupation than person life of Seaman. There was enough risk of some sort of harm that US should bear burden | |||
|rule= | |||
|comments=Judge basically said that law should perhaps change. | |||
|case_text_links= | |||
|Court_opinion_parts= | |Court_opinion_parts= | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:42, July 14, 2023
Ira S. Bushey & Sons, Inc. v. U.S. | |
Court | |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | April 3, 1974 |
Facts
Bushy owned dry docks upon which US Coast Guard Vessel Tamaroa was dry docked for repairs. Just after midnight on the night in question, a drunk seaman Lane entered the docks and turned valves to flood the tanks on one side of the dock. The dock w/ ship listed to the side, and the ship slid off the dock, colliding with a wall, then partially sunk.
Issues
Is the US responsible for the actions its employee took?
Holding
Yes.
Reasons
Occurrence was more related to occupation than person life of Seaman. There was enough risk of some sort of harm that US should bear burden
Comments
Judge basically said that law should perhaps change.