MRS. BARBARA JEAN HORNSBY ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
THE FISH MEAL COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES; JERALDINE FRUGE WILLIAMS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V. LOUISIANA MENHADEN COMPANY, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that an action for wrongful death exists in admiralty, allowing for the application of comparative negligence.
Two pilots died when their aircraft collided over the Gulf of Mexico while spotting fish. The District Court found both pilots 50% at fault but denied…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Death On The High Seas Act cases and more on FLexlaw
JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge:
Time and tide do not wait, but Courts do.1 What was a perplexing issue has been resolved by the deliverance of the Supreme Court, an event for which we hopefully waited.
This case arose from the events on a clear summer afternoon in 1966. Roy Hornsby and Charles Williams were piloting small, single engine aircraft over the Gulf of Mexico, within one marine league of the Louisiana shore and thus the Death on the High Seas by Wrongful Act statute is inapplicable. 46 U.S. C.A. § 761 et seq. Each was engaged in spotting schools of menhaden for their respective employers’ surface fishing boats when their aircraft collided, plunging into the sea and killing the pilots.
There has been no adequate explanation of the causes and exact circumstances of the collision. The survivors of each pilot sought damages for their wrongful deaths. And the District Court, 285 F.Supp. 990, assessed responsibility for this aeronautical enigma by attributing the cause of the collision to each pilot — 50% to Hornsby and 50% to Williams. The District Court, however, denied recovery to both families on the ground that there was no death action at admiralty and that under the adjacent state’s — Louisiana—wrongful death ac tion applicable contributory negligence was an absolute bar.2
We reverse the District Court. There is now a cause of action for wrongful death in admiralty that is not dependent on adjacent state law. Consequently, the traditional admiralty comparative negligence doctrine is applicable. This has been done, hopefully in response to this Court’s entreaties in Emerson, Trinidad, and others, see note 2, supra, by the Supreme Court’s recent action in Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 1970, 398 U.S. 375, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 26 L.Ed.2d 339, 1970 A.M.C., where the Court overruled The Harrisburg, 1886, 119 U.S. 199, 7 S.Ct. 140, 30 L.Ed. 358, which held there was no action for wrongful death at admiralty.
The survivors of both Williams and Hornsby also argue that the factual conclusion of the District Court that the negligence of each pilot was 50% of the cause of the collision is clearly erroneous. We have, however, carefully reviewed the record and the precise and extensive findings of facts of the District Court and in the light of that review we hold that those findings are still buoyant and not below their Plimsoli mark. See F.R.Civ.P. 52(a). The same is true to the extent there is a serious effort to scuttle them by the employers-airplane owners. Thus we remand this case to the command of the District Court for a determination of the damages suffered by the survivors of each pilot. Grigsby v. Coastal Marine Service, etc., 5 Cir., 1969, 412 F. 2d 1011, 1023-1029, 1969 A.M.C. 1513.
Reversed and remanded.
. Decision in this case was deferred pending Supreme Court action in Moragne. infra. Delay
. The District Court took great pains to divine the applicable state standard in the pale dawn of The Tungus v. Skovgaard, 1958, 358 U.S. 588, 79 S.Ct. 503, 3 L.Ed. 2d 524, 1959 A.M.C. 813; Emerson v. Holloway Concrete Products Co., 5 Cir. 1960, 282 F. 2d 271, 278, 1961 A.M.C. 1484, (dissenting opinion); Thibodeaux v. J. Ray McDermott & Co., 5 Cir., 1960, 276 F. 2d 42, 47, 1961 A.M.C. 1469; and Kenney v. Trinidad Corp., 5 Cir., 1965, 349 F. 2d 832, 1965 A.M.C. 1659, and the twilight of L.C.C. art. 2315. See Hu-son v. Chevron Oil Co., 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F. 2d 27, 1970 A.M.C. Full daylight is, however, now available. See Moragne, infra.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City OF Cleveland, 409 U.S. 249 (U.S. 1972)
-
Garland Wayne Kelly and Allen Eugene Kelly, Sr. v. Smith, 485 F.2d 520 (5th Cir. 1973)
-
Petition of Canal Barge Co., Inc. v. Griffith, 480 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 1973)
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375 (U.S. 1970)
- The Harrisburg, 119 U.S. 199 (U.S. 1886)
- THE Tungus v. Skovgaard, 358 U.S. 588 (U.S. 1959)
- Grigsby v. Coastal Marine Serv. OF Tex., Inc., 412 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Emerson v. Holloway Concrete Prods. Co., Inc., 282 F.2d 271 (5th Cir. 1960)
- House v. Mayo, 276 F.2d 42 (5th Cir. 1960)
- Beota Rogers Thibodeaux v. J. RAY McDERMOTT & Co., Inc., 276 F.2d 42 (5th Cir. 1960)
- Gaines Ted Huson v. Chevron OIL Co., 430 F.2d 27 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Kenney v. Trinidad Corp., 349 F.2d 832 (5th Cir. 1965)