CONCACIS YOHANES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
AYERS STEAMSHIP CO., INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
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 the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint and declining jurisdiction.
A Greek seaman sued for personal injuries sustained aboard a Greek-flagged vessel. The employment contract was entered into in Greece, and the seaman …
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 Lauritzen V. Larsen Factors cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The appellant Yohanes complains of the district court’s action in dismissing his complaint upon defendant’s motion for summary judgment.1 There is no dispute as to the material facts. We affirm.
Yohanes is a Greek seaman who sued for damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained aboard the S/S SKI-NOS on April 6, 1970, when the vessel was in the port of New Orleans. Yohanes brought suit under the Jones Act and general maritime law against the foreign chartered and owned corporations which owned and operated the vessel and the domestic corporation which acted as the general agent for the time-charterer of the vessel. The S/S SKINOS is a vessel of Greek registration and flag. The employment contract was entered into in Piraeus, Greece, and Yohanes signed aboard the vessel in Germany.
Our review of the record and briefs in this case convinces us that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The district court carefully considered the facts here involved in light of the factors outlined in Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571, 73 S.Ct. 921, 97 L.Ed. 1254 (1953). The court’s detailed analysis was proper and we find that the record supports his conclusion that the Jones Act is not applicable
and that the court should decline jurisdiction of the general maritime claim on the grounds of forum non conveniens. Anastasiadis v. S/S Little John, 346 F. 2d 281 (5th Cir. 1965), cert. denied 384 U.S. 920, 86 S.Ct. 1368, 16 L.Ed.2d 440 (1966).
The judgment is affirmed.
. In its order the district court stayed its dismissal for ninety (90) days. The following is from the court’s order:
The judgment of dismissal is stayed for 90 days to allow the plaintiff to file his complaint in the proper foreign tribunal having jurisdiction. If defendants enter an unconditional appearance in the foreign tribunal, and file a bond for security or letter of undertaking in the amount of $100,000.00, the claims under the Jones Act and general maritime law will be dismissed. If defendants fail to do so, this order will be recalled.
. Cf. Hellenic Lines, Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 412 F. 2d 919 (5th Cir. 1969), affirmed 398 U.S. 306, 90 S.Ct. 1731, 26 L.Ed.2d 252 (1970).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fisher v. The Agios Nicolaos V, 628 F.2d 308 (5th Cir. 1980)
-
Nunez-Lozano v. Oivind Lorentzen Rederi, 634 F.2d 135 (5th Cir. 1980)
-
Rosauro Quintero v. Klaveness Ship Lines, 914 F.2d 717 (5th Cir. 1990)
Authorities Cited
- Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571 (U.S. 1953)
- Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306 (U.S. 1970)
- Iordanis Anastasiadis v. S.S. Little John, 346 F.2d 281 (5th Cir. 1965)
- Hellenic Lines Ltd. & Universal Cargo Carriers, Inc. v. Zacharias Rhoditis, 412 F.2d 919 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Anastasiadis v. The Little John, 384 U.S. 920 (U.S. 1966)
- Dixon v. Rhay, 384 U.S. 920 (U.S. 1966)