MRS. LAURA KAISER, WIFE OF/AND IGNATIUS J. BARRECA, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS CROSS APPELLEES,
v.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, HENRY BRIEN, JR., AND TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO., GEORGE TRANCHINA, COASTAL SAND & GRAVEL CO., AND FIDELITY & CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES CROSS APPELLANTS

5th Cir. | 1974-08-28
No. 73-2653
496 F.2d 531 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1974) Negative Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court granted the petition for rehearing and ordered the case set for oral argument.


Facts & Procedural History

The case was originally decided based on precedent that disallowed recovery for loss of love and affection in death actions under general maritime law…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is granted.

This case was originally decided on the basis of Canal Barge Co. v. Griffith, 480 F. 2d 11 (5th Cir. 1973), which held that there could be no recovery for loss of love and affection in a death action brought under the general maritime law.

Plaintiffs have requested rehearing in the light of Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Gaudet, 414 U.S. 573, 94 S.Ct. 806, 39 L.Ed.2d 9 (1974). In McDonald v. Federal Barge Lines, Inc., 496 F. 2d 1376 (5th Cir. 1974), this Court in effect held that Sea-Land Services overruled that aspect of Canal Barge.

Defendants have requested that if rehearing is granted, they be given an opportunity to argue the liability questions raised by way of cross-appeal. When this case was originally decided, it had not seemed necessary to reach these issues in view of our determination of the damage issue under the rationale of Canal Barge. It now appearing that such issues should be decided on the oral argument calendar, rather than the summary calendar,

It is ordered that this appeal, including the cross-appeal, be set for oral argument as if the case had been originally screened for oral argument rather than the summary calendar. The Clerk shall set a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw