AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

MAMAT v. UNITED FRUIT CO.

CONGER, District Judge.

Motion granted and complaint dismissed on authority of Kraft v. A.H. Bull S.S. Co., D.C., 28 F. Supp. 437. The within case differs from Hunt v. United States, D.C., 17 F. Supp. 578, affirmed, 2 Cir., 91 F.2d 1014, certiorari denied 302 U.S. 752, 58 S.Ct. 271, 82 L.Ed. 581, in that the seaman in the Hunt case was hired as a member of the crew, paid weekly on a monthly basis, slept and ate on the vessel and was subject to discipline of the master and chief officer. In the within case the seaman was discharged as a member of the crew and was hired as a member of a "shore gang" to effect repairs and was not under the direction of the master or any ship officer. The test is whether the seaman is a member of the crew. I think not in the instant case.

Settle order on notice.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MAMAT v. UNITED FRUIT CO., (S.D.N.Y. 1940)
(Dec 23, 1940)