Rodermond v. United States

Third Circuit

Rodermond v. United States

179 F.2d 955, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2291

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedFebruary 16, 1950

Docket10028

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 179 F.2d 955 (Rodermond v. United States) 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

Rodermond v. United States, 179 F.2d 955, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2291 (3d Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The female plaintiff sues defendant for personal injuries suffered when she fell from the gangway of a ship of the defendant. Her husband also sues for damages sustained by him as a consequence of the injuries to his wife. The court below found in favor of the defendant. That judgment must be affirmed.

We think it highly doubtful whether a finding that the defendant was negligent with respect to the maintenance of this gangway could be sustained. And that is the only basis on which negligence could be predicated. We do not need to agree or disagree with the trial court’s conclusion that the proximate cause of the injury was the intoxication of both plaintiffs at the time of the accident. While we do not think the plaintiff was a trespasser on the ship, since her presence there on occasions prior to the accident was known to the captain and not objected to by him, it is clear that the woman was at most a licensee, not a business guest. Her presence there certainly had nothing to do with the business of the defendant. Cf. Restatement, Torts §§ 331, 332. The duty with regard to the condition of the premises owed to the gratuitous licensee does not rise very high. It consists simply in the responsibility for informing the licensee of hidden dangers, the existence of which are known to the licensor but not to the licensee. Cf. Restatement, Torts §§ 340, 342. If there was anything wrong with this gangway it must have been well known to both the plaintiffs for it had been traveled by them more than once prior to the accident.

The judgment will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The female plaintiff sues defendant for personal injuries suffered when she fell from the gangway of a ship of the defendant. Her husband also sues for damages sustained by him as a consequence of the injuries to his wife. The court below found in favor of the defendant. That judgment must be affirmed.

We think it highly doubtful whether a finding that the defendant was negligent with respect to the maintenance of this gangway could be sustained. And that is the only basis on which negligence could be predicated. We do not need to agree or disagree with the trial court’s conclusion that the proximate cause of the injury was the intoxication of both plaintiffs at the time of the accident. While we do not think the plaintiff was a trespasser on the ship, since her presence there on occasions prior to the accident was known to the captain and not objected to by him, it is clear that the woman was at most a licensee, not a business guest. Her presence there certainly had nothing to do with the business of the defendant. Cf. Restatement, Torts §§ 331, 332. The duty with regard to the condition of the premises owed to the gratuitous licensee does not rise very high. It consists simply in the responsibility for informing the licensee of hidden dangers, the existence of which are known to the licensor but not to the licensee. Cf. Restatement, Torts §§ 340, 342. If there was anything wrong with this gangway it must have been well known to both the plaintiffs for it had been traveled by them more than once prior to the accident.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F.2d 955, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodermond-v-united-states-ca3-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack