Hiner v. Longstaff

W.D. Washington

Hiner v. Longstaff

543 F. Supp. 1123, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9595

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington

DecidedApril 13, 1982

DocketC80-1238B

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 543 F. Supp. 1123 (Hiner v. Longstaff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hiner v. Longstaff, 543 F. Supp. 1123, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9595 (W.D. Wash. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER DISMISSING THE CITY OF ANACORTES

BEEKS, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff’s husband, Vernon Hiner, was a member of the crew of the S/S CHESTNUT HILL. On March 1, 1980, Hiner returned from shore on the tug SEAWOLF II to his ship which was anchored in Puget Sound near Anacortes, Washington. While boarding the ship, he fell from the gangway and nearly drowned. Hiner was rescued *1124 and placed on the tug whose crew began coronary pulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The tug returned Hiner to the dock where he was attended by the Anacortes’ emergency paramedic rescue team. When the paramedics first reached Hiner, he was cold and lifeless notwithstanding the ongoing CPR. The paramedics administered first aid on the tug’s deck for approximately fifteen minutes before transporting Hiner to the local hospital. Two weeks later, Hiner died.

Hiner's wife sued the tug’s owner and the City of Anacortes. Plaintiff claims defendant Longstaff provided an unseaworthy tug which was negligent in rescuing the decedent. Plaintiff also claims Anacortes negligently provided treatment. Specifically, the paramedics are accused of improperly placing an endotracheal tube into the decedent’s mouth, thereby contributing to his death.

Anacortes now moves for summary judgment of dismissal alleging a lack of admiralty jurisdiction and alternatively statutory immunity under Wash.Rev.Code § 18.-71.200-210 (1978).

Since Executive Jet v. City of Cleveland, 409 U.S. 249, 93 S.Ct. 493, 34 L.Ed.2d 454 (1972), locality alone has not been a sufficient predicate for establishing maritime jurisdiction. There must now be a significant maritime relationship between the claimed negligence and traditional maritime activities. See Duncanson-Harrelson Co. v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, 644 F.2d 827, 830 (9th Cir. 1981). The emergency first aid which the paramedics rendered was only fortuitously and incidentally connected to the navigable waters and bears no relationship to traditional maritime activity. See Executive Jet, 409 U.S. at 273, 93 S.Ct. at 506. Accordingly, in the absence of admiralty jurisdiction, plaintiff’s claims against the City of Anacortes are dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

ORDER DISMISSING THE CITY OF ANACORTES

BEEKS, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff’s husband, Vernon Hiner, was a member of the crew of the S/S CHESTNUT HILL. On March 1, 1980, Hiner returned from shore on the tug SEAWOLF II to his ship which was anchored in Puget Sound near Anacortes, Washington. While boarding the ship, he fell from the gangway and nearly drowned. Hiner was rescued *1124 and placed on the tug whose crew began coronary pulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The tug returned Hiner to the dock where he was attended by the Anacortes’ emergency paramedic rescue team. When the paramedics first reached Hiner, he was cold and lifeless notwithstanding the ongoing CPR. The paramedics administered first aid on the tug’s deck for approximately fifteen minutes before transporting Hiner to the local hospital. Two weeks later, Hiner died.

Hiner's wife sued the tug’s owner and the City of Anacortes. Plaintiff claims defendant Longstaff provided an unseaworthy tug which was negligent in rescuing the decedent. Plaintiff also claims Anacortes negligently provided treatment. Specifically, the paramedics are accused of improperly placing an endotracheal tube into the decedent’s mouth, thereby contributing to his death.

Anacortes now moves for summary judgment of dismissal alleging a lack of admiralty jurisdiction and alternatively statutory immunity under Wash.Rev.Code § 18.-71.200-210 (1978).

Since Executive Jet v. City of Cleveland, 409 U.S. 249, 93 S.Ct. 493, 34 L.Ed.2d 454 (1972), locality alone has not been a sufficient predicate for establishing maritime jurisdiction. There must now be a significant maritime relationship between the claimed negligence and traditional maritime activities. See Duncanson-Harrelson Co. v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, 644 F.2d 827, 830 (9th Cir. 1981). The emergency first aid which the paramedics rendered was only fortuitously and incidentally connected to the navigable waters and bears no relationship to traditional maritime activity. See Executive Jet, 409 U.S. at 273, 93 S.Ct. at 506. Accordingly, in the absence of admiralty jurisdiction, plaintiff’s claims against the City of Anacortes are dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

543 F. Supp. 1123, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hiner-v-longstaff-wawd-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack