Leonard R. Smith v. Crain Brothers, Inc

Third Circuit

Leonard R. Smith v. Crain Brothers, Inc

339 F.2d 599, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 3507

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedDecember 22, 1964

Docket14893, 14894

StatusPublished

This text of 339 F.2d 599 (Leonard R. Smith v. Crain Brothers, Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leonard R. Smith v. Crain Brothers, Inc, 339 F.2d 599, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 3507 (3d Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, a seaman employed by the defendant on its M. V. Allegheny, has appealed from two judgments of the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The appeal in No. 14893 is from the judgment entered on a verdict for the defendant in the plaintiff’s civil action for damages for personal injuries incurred in the service of the defendant’s vessel. The action was grounded on negligence, under the Jones Act, and unseaworthiness. The appeal in No. 14894 is from the judgment entered on a verdict for $1,000 for the plaintiff in his admiralty suit for maintenance and cure and damages for failure to pay such maintenance and cure. The award of $1,000 by the jury was stated by it to be “for suffering, pain and inconvenience only.”

The testimony was sharply conflicting as to the nature and cause of the plaintiff’s accident. Under a full, eminently fair and adequate charge by the trial judge the conflict was resolved by the jury in the defendant’s favor. Although the plaintiff is understandably unhappy with that result there is no basis for reviewing it here. The plaintiff accordingly limits himself to asserting error in certain rulings on evidence, to certain *600 instructions given and refused and to the failure of the trial judge to rule on the plaintiff’s requests for instructions prior to the arguments of counsel, although not requested to do so. We have carefully considered all of these matters but find them so lacking in merit as to require no discussion here.

The judgments of the district court will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, a seaman employed by the defendant on its M. V. Allegheny, has appealed from two judgments of the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The appeal in No. 14893 is from the judgment entered on a verdict for the defendant in the plaintiff’s civil action for damages for personal injuries incurred in the service of the defendant’s vessel. The action was grounded on negligence, under the Jones Act, and unseaworthiness. The appeal in No. 14894 is from the judgment entered on a verdict for $1,000 for the plaintiff in his admiralty suit for maintenance and cure and damages for failure to pay such maintenance and cure. The award of $1,000 by the jury was stated by it to be “for suffering, pain and inconvenience only.”

The testimony was sharply conflicting as to the nature and cause of the plaintiff’s accident. Under a full, eminently fair and adequate charge by the trial judge the conflict was resolved by the jury in the defendant’s favor. Although the plaintiff is understandably unhappy with that result there is no basis for reviewing it here. The plaintiff accordingly limits himself to asserting error in certain rulings on evidence, to certain *600 instructions given and refused and to the failure of the trial judge to rule on the plaintiff’s requests for instructions prior to the arguments of counsel, although not requested to do so. We have carefully considered all of these matters but find them so lacking in merit as to require no discussion here.

The judgments of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

339 F.2d 599, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 3507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leonard-r-smith-v-crain-brothers-inc-ca3-1964.