Piascik v. United States

S.D. New York

Piascik v. United States

65 F. Supp. 430, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1506

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedJuly 21, 1944

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 65 F. Supp. 430 (Piascik v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Piascik v. United States, 65 F. Supp. 430, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1506 (S.D.N.Y. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

BONDY, District Judge.

The libellant’s contention that the libel states a cause of action under Public Law 17, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 1291, can not be sustained because the law expressly provides that it applies only to seamen employed through the War Ship-' ping Administration, and because there is no allegation of such fact. Nor can the contention that the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688 applies, be sustained. The Suits in Admiralty Act, 46 U.S.C.A. §§ 741-752, provides a remedy against the United States. This is the exclusive remedy against the United States on the facts alleged. Johnson v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation, 280, U.S. 320, 327, 50 S.Ct. 118, 74 L.Ed. 451. See Brady v. Roosevelt S.S. Co., 317 U.S. 575, 63 S.Ct. 425, 87 L.Ed. 471. Under this statute suit must be brought within two years after the cause of action arises, 46 U. S.C.A. § 745, that is, two years after death, and not as contended, two years after the appointment of an administrator. See Reading Co. v. Koons, 271 U.S. 58, 46 S.Ct. 405, 70 L.Ed. 835. This limitation is incorporated by reference in Public Law 17, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 1291 and Public Vessels Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 782, which was also referred to by counsel.

It may be noted that no facts are disclosed showing that this is the proper district in which this suit should be brought. See 46 U.S.C.A. § 742; Blamberg Bros. v. United States, 260 U.S. 452, 43 S.Ct. 179,. 67 L.Ed. 346.

The exceptions accordingly are sustained and the libel dismissed with leave to amend.

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

BONDY, District Judge.

The libellant’s contention that the libel states a cause of action under Public Law 17, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 1291, can not be sustained because the law expressly provides that it applies only to seamen employed through the War Ship-' ping Administration, and because there is no allegation of such fact. Nor can the contention that the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688 applies, be sustained. The Suits in Admiralty Act, 46 U.S.C.A. §§ 741-752, provides a remedy against the United States. This is the exclusive remedy against the United States on the facts alleged. Johnson v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation, 280, U.S. 320, 327, 50 S.Ct. 118, 74 L.Ed. 451. See Brady v. Roosevelt S.S. Co., 317 U.S. 575, 63 S.Ct. 425, 87 L.Ed. 471. Under this statute suit must be brought within two years after the cause of action arises, 46 U. S.C.A. § 745, that is, two years after death, and not as contended, two years after the appointment of an administrator. See Reading Co. v. Koons, 271 U.S. 58, 46 S.Ct. 405, 70 L.Ed. 835. This limitation is incorporated by reference in Public Law 17, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 1291 and Public Vessels Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 782, which was also referred to by counsel.

It may be noted that no facts are disclosed showing that this is the proper district in which this suit should be brought. See 46 U.S.C.A. § 742; Blamberg Bros. v. United States, 260 U.S. 452, 43 S.Ct. 179,. 67 L.Ed. 346.

The exceptions accordingly are sustained and the libel dismissed with leave to amend.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 F. Supp. 430, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/piascik-v-united-states-nysd-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack