Keiley v. The Allianca

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Keiley v. The Allianca

44 F. 97, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 1816

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedNovember 15, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 44 F. 97 (Keiley v. The Allianca) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Keiley v. The Allianca, 44 F. 97, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 1816 (circtsdny 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Grube, a minor, while at work inside one of the large boilers of the steam-ship Allianca, on August 17, 1889, was scalded by the escape of hot water and steam into the boiler, such hot water and steam coming from apparatus outside the boiler in charge and under the control of the engineer of the vessel. Grube at the time was in the employ of one Ryan, a contractor, who had been employed by the master of the steam-ship to clean the inside of the boilers. In consequence of his injuries, Grube suffered great pain, and was confined in the hospital for three months. The district court in its decree allowed him $750 damages for his injuries. It is entirely clear that the libelant is entitled to recover, and that the sum awarded him in the court below was no more than a fair compensation for his injuries. The master of the steamship, having employed Ryan to work.inside the boiler, owed an active duty to him and his employes thus invited there to see that they were not exposed to any unnecessary hazard while there. Grube was injured by an escape of steam, which was inevitably perilous to his safety, and which would not have happened if those in charge of the steam-ship had used proper diligence in taking care of the steam apparatus under their control. It is quite immaterial whether the engineer, or any of his subordinates, let the steam escape, or whether some intermeddling stranger did so. Those in charge wore bound to exercise proper supervision over the apparatus for the safety of those who might be injured by any relaxation of vigilance on their part; and if a stranger meddled with the apparatus, that circumstance implies negligent supervision by those in charge. I have no doubt, however, that the presumption is that those in charge of the steam apparatus let the steam escape, and that the burden was on the steam-ship, under the circumstances, to exonerate herself from negligence. A decree is ordered for tho libelant for $750, and for the costs of the district court as taxed, with interest from the date of the decree and the costs of this court.

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

Wallace, J.

Grube, a minor, while at work inside one of the large boilers of the steam-ship Allianca, on August 17, 1889, was scalded by the escape of hot water and steam into the boiler, such hot water and steam coming from apparatus outside the boiler in charge and under the control of the engineer of the vessel. Grube at the time was in the employ of one Ryan, a contractor, who had been employed by the master of the steam-ship to clean the inside of the boilers. In consequence of his injuries, Grube suffered great pain, and was confined in the hospital for three months. The district court in its decree allowed him $750 damages for his injuries. It is entirely clear that the libelant is entitled to recover, and that the sum awarded him in the court below was no more than a fair compensation for his injuries. The master of the steamship, having employed Ryan to work.inside the boiler, owed an active duty to him and his employes thus invited there to see that they were not exposed to any unnecessary hazard while there. Grube was injured by an escape of steam, which was inevitably perilous to his safety, and which would not have happened if those in charge of the steam-ship had used proper diligence in taking care of the steam apparatus under their control. It is quite immaterial whether the engineer, or any of his subordinates, let the steam escape, or whether some intermeddling stranger did so. Those in charge wore bound to exercise proper supervision over the apparatus for the safety of those who might be injured by any relaxation of vigilance on their part; and if a stranger meddled with the apparatus, that circumstance implies negligent supervision by those in charge. I have no doubt, however, that the presumption is that those in charge of the steam apparatus let the steam escape, and that the burden was on the steam-ship, under the circumstances, to exonerate herself from negligence. A decree is ordered for tho libelant for $750, and for the costs of the district court as taxed, with interest from the date of the decree and the costs of this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 F. 97, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 1816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keiley-v-the-allianca-circtsdny-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack