Miller v. Western Stevedore Co.

270 P. 310, 149 Wash. 698, 1928 Wash. LEXIS 669
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. Western Stevedore Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 148 Wash. 155
Washington Supreme Court·Decided September 25, 1928·No. No. 21130. Department Two.·Published

Opinion

On Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

In the petition for rehearing in this case our attention is especially called to two decisions both of which were cited in the briefs in the case and considered at the time the Departmental opinion was written, but it was not then thought *699 necessary to specially notice them. One of these cases is Alaska Pacific Steamship Co. v. Egan, 202 Fed. 867, which differs from the case now before us in that there the action was not against a stevedore contracting to do a particular thing upon a vessel and using the vessel’s appliances in pursuit of the work. The other case, that of Port of New York Stevedoring Corporation v. Castagna, 280 Fed. 618, is different in that there the defect which caused the plaintiff’s injury, as shown by the evidence, was obvious and the slightest inspection would have discovered it.

The Departmental opinion reported in 148 Wash. 155, 268 Pac. 177, is adhered to and the petition for rehearing will be denied.

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

Miller v. Western Stevedore Co., 270 P. 310, 149 Wash. 698, 1928 Wash. LEXIS 669 (Wash. 1928).

270 P. 310 (Miller v. Western Stevedore Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miller v. Western Stevedore Co.
268 P. 177 (Washington Supreme Court, 1928)
Alaska Pacific S. S. Co. v. Egan
202 F. 867 (Ninth Circuit, 1913)
Port of New York Stevedoring Corp. v. Castagna
280 F. 618 (Second Circuit, 1922)