Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

negligencecontributory negligence
defendantnegligenceverdictmotioncontributory negligenceappellee

Related Cases

Weekes v. Kelley, 433 S.W.2d 769
View Case »
Sierra Vista Hospital v. Superior Court for San Luis Obispo County, 248 Cal.App.2d 359, 56 Cal.Rptr. 387
View Case »
Gulf Coast State Bank v. Emenhiser, 562 S.W.2d 449, 23 UCC Rep.Serv. 1259
View Case »
Hurn v. Woods, 132 Cal.App.3d 896, 183 Cal.Rptr. 495
View Case »
Seaside Farm, Inc. v. United States, 842 F.3d 853
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Miley v. Delta Marine Drilling Co., 473 F.2d 856, 1974 A.M.C. 1591

Facts

Burns Miley was employed as a roustabout on the DELTA MARINE 8, a vessel converted from a Navy Landing Ship Tank to an offshore drilling tender. After the vessel was ordered to drydock for inspection, Miley was tasked with on-loading anchor chains, which required him to manually tier the chains in a chain bin. During this process, he fell four to six feet when the chain he was handling unexpectedly turned, exacerbating a preexisting arthritic condition.

The DELTA MARINE 8 was originally a Navy Landing Ship Tank (LST). After the second World War it was converted into an offshore drilling tender and is presently owned by the appellee, Delta Marine Drilling Company. As a part of the conversion process the original bow which consisted of two clamshell doors was replaced by a pointed section containing four chain bins. The additional chains provided added stability while mooring offshore.

Issue

Whether the issue of contributory negligence of the crew member was properly submitted to the jury in the personal injury action.

Whether the issue of contributory negligence of the crew member was properly submitted to the jury in the personal injury action.

Rule

A person may be found contributorily negligent even when performing duties as ordered, as negligence can arise from the manner in which assigned tasks are executed.

While a person may be ordered to perform in a certain manner, it is plausible that he may yet perform a negligent act in carrying out his assigned duties.

Analysis

The court determined that the jury was justified in considering Miley's actions during the on-loading process as potentially negligent. Despite being ordered to perform the task, the court noted that Miley's execution of the task could still involve negligent actions, thus allowing the jury to assess his level of contributory negligence.

The defendant Delta sufficiently met its affirmative burden of establishing the defense of contributory negligence to withstand the motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding verdict.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the district court's judgment, concluding that the jury's finding of contributory negligence was supported by the evidence.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Who won?

Delta Marine Drilling Company prevailed in the case because the court upheld the jury's finding of contributory negligence against Miley, which reduced his compensation.

Delta Marine Drilling Company prevailed in the case because the court upheld the jury's finding of contributory negligence against Miley, which reduced his compensation.

You must be