Preview:

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 96-C-0803 MELVIN AND LOU FOSTER Versus DESTIN TRADING CORPORATION AND BLESSY MARINE SERVICE, INC.

Calogero, C.J., dissenting. I dissent from the majority opinion because I believe that the vessel in question was indeed unseaworthy. Plaintiff is entitled to recover a mitigated amount of damages due to his own negligence in helping to create the unseaworthy condition. The majority properly points out that the nature of the duty owed by a vessel owner to furnish a seaworthy vessel is absolute and nondelegable. Moreover, a determination of a shipowner's liability for the unseaworthiness of its vessel is completely divorced from the concepts of negligence and independent of its duty under the Jones Act to exercise reasonable care. Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, 362 U.S. 539, 549-50 (1960). Thus, the shipowner's liability is not contingent upon its actual or constructive knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. Id. at 549. As the majority correctly notes, the nondelegable nature of this duty means that unseaworthy conditions, even though created by third parties, without knowledge of the vessel owner, will still render the owner liable. In light of these legal principles, I believe that the narrow question is whether the mere existence of the condition in place-- the unsafe board used as a walkway-- created an unseaworthy condition. The majority finds the vessel seaworthy because the pine board was fit for the use that Blessy intended to ascribe to it. However, at the time of the accident, it was being used, albeit against Blessy's oral policy, for another purpose. It is established beyond question that misuse of even nondefective, otherwise seaworthy equipment may nevertheless create an unseaworthy condition. 2 M. Norris, The Law of Seaman

Download 96c0803.pfc.pdf

Louisiana Law