Krolczyk v. Waterways Navigation Co.

151 F. Supp. 873, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3643
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan
DecidedMay 21, 1957
DocketCiv. A. 15729
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 151 F. Supp. 873 (Krolczyk v. Waterways Navigation Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Krolczyk v. Waterways Navigation Co., 151 F. Supp. 873, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3643 (E.D. Mich. 1957).

Opinion

LEVIN, District Judge.

This libel in admiralty is brought by a longshoreman for personal injuries sustained while working aboard the S.S. Ralph Caulkins on January 6, 1956'. The ship had been decommissioned and laid up for winter on December 5, 1955 at a dock on the Detroit River.' She was then under contract to store grain for the winter. On January 3, 1956 the ship was moved by tugs and without a navigating crew to another dock in order to unload her cargo. It was during the course of unloading on January 6, 1956 that the libelant was injured.

As this accident occurred on the Detroit River, a navigation waterway in the Great Lakes chain, the libelant claims that he is entitled to a jury trial under the Great Lakes Jury Statute, 5 Stat. 726 (1845), 28 U.S.C.A. § 1873 (1950). The statute provides:

“In any case of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction relating to any matter of contract or tort arising upon or concerning any vessel of twenty tons or upward, enrolled and licensed for the coasting trade, and employed in the business of commerce and navigation between places in different states upon the lakes and navigable waters connecting said lakes, the trial of all issues of fact shall be by jury if either party demands it.”

The only issue is whether the S.S. Ralph Caulkins was “employed in the business of commerce and navigation” when the accident occurred. A ship is no longer in navigation when it is laid up for the winter and used solely as a floating warehouse. Since she was not then employed in navigation it is unnecessary to consider whether she was then engaged in commerce. See, The Richard Winslow, 7 Cir., 1896, 71 F. 426; Hawn v. American S.S. Co., 2 Cir., 1939, 107 F.2d 999.

Accordingly, the libelant’s demand for a jury trial will be denied.

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

Related

Roper v. United States
368 U.S. 20 (Supreme Court, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
151 F. Supp. 873, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krolczyk-v-waterways-navigation-co-mied-1957.