Albert C. Burns, as Personal Representative of and for Mrs. Addie Bell Eisenmann, Widow of Woodrow Browder v. Lykes Brothers Steamship Company, Inc.

Fifth Circuit

Albert C. Burns, as Personal Representative of and for Mrs. Addie Bell Eisenmann, Widow of Woodrow Browder v. Lykes Brothers Steamship Company, Inc.

359 F.2d 431, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 3, 1966

Docket22487

StatusPublished

This text of 359 F.2d 431 (Albert C. Burns, as Personal Representative of and for Mrs. Addie Bell Eisenmann, Widow of Woodrow Browder v. Lykes Brothers Steamship Company, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albert C. Burns, as Personal Representative of and for Mrs. Addie Bell Eisenmann, Widow of Woodrow Browder v. Lykes Brothers Steamship Company, Inc., 359 F.2d 431, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305 (5th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the personal representative and widow of a deceased ordinary seaman from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, dismissing their suit brought under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688, after the Court directed a verdict in favor of the appellee at the close of appellant’s case. The basis of the claim of negligence against the appellee ship owner was the alleged failure to provide proper medical care to the deceased seaman while aboard ship.

The District Court expressed doubt that there was sufficient proof of a causal connection between the seaman’s *432 death and his illness and treatment; but for the purpose of passing upon the appellee’s motion for a directed verdict, assumed that such causal connection had been established. The motion for directed verdict was granted because the trial court concluded that there was a failure of proof of any negligence on the part of the appellee.

In our review of the action of the trial court, all conflicts in the evidence, or in the inferences which may be drawn therefrom, must be resolved against the appellee and in favor of the appellant. A careful review of the record convinces us that the trial court did not commit error in granting the motion of the appellee for a directed verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the personal representative and widow of a deceased ordinary seaman from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, dismissing their suit brought under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688, after the Court directed a verdict in favor of the appellee at the close of appellant’s case. The basis of the claim of negligence against the appellee ship owner was the alleged failure to provide proper medical care to the deceased seaman while aboard ship.

The District Court expressed doubt that there was sufficient proof of a causal connection between the seaman’s *432 death and his illness and treatment; but for the purpose of passing upon the appellee’s motion for a directed verdict, assumed that such causal connection had been established. The motion for directed verdict was granted because the trial court concluded that there was a failure of proof of any negligence on the part of the appellee.

In our review of the action of the trial court, all conflicts in the evidence, or in the inferences which may be drawn therefrom, must be resolved against the appellee and in favor of the appellant. A careful review of the record convinces us that the trial court did not commit error in granting the motion of the appellee for a directed verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 F.2d 431, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albert-c-burns-as-personal-representative-of-and-for-mrs-addie-bell-ca5-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack