MORONES

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Harney v. William M. Moore Bldg. Corp. & Lopier Constr. Corp., 359 F.2d 649 (2d Cir. 1966)
  …d on to exclude longshoremen’s Jones Act claims. Garland v. Alaska S. S. Co., 217 F.Supp. 757 (D.Alaska 1963), Conzo v. Moore-McCormack Lines, 114 F.Supp. 956 (S.D.N.Y.1953), and Kyles v. James W. Elwell & Co., 296 F. 2d 703 (7 Cir.1961), cert. den. 369 U.S. 852, 82 S.Ct. 936, 8 L.Ed.2d 10 (1962). But since plaintiff there is not claiming to be a seaman for the purposes of the Jones Act, that remedy is barred anyway. Swanson v. Marra Bros., 328 U.S. 1, 66 S.Ct. 869, 90 L.Ed. 1045 (1946); Aycock v. Lykes Bro…
• Bertram A. Watson v. Gulf Stevedore Corp., 374 F.2d 946 (5th Cir. 1967)
  …. 281 (E.D.Va.1966). . Accord, Rodgers v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R., 323 F. 2d 996 (2d Cir. 1963), cert, denied, 376 U.S. 932, 84 S.Ct. 701, 11 [*949] L.Ed.2d 651 (1964); Kyles v. James W. Elwell & Co., 296 F. 2d 703, 706 (7th Cir. 1961), cert, denied, 369 U.S. 852, 82 S.Ct. 936, 8 L.Ed.2d 10 (1962); Thibodeaux v. J. Ray McDermott & Co., 276 F. 2d 42 (5th Cir. 1960); Smither & Co., Inc. v. Coles, supra; Garland v. The S.S. Illiamna, 198 F.Supp. 187 (D.Alaska 1961); Skow v. Gypsum Carrier, Inc., 164 F.Supp. 879…
• Price v. SS Yaracuy, 378 F.2d 156 (5th Cir. 1967)
  …restricted remedy of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688. Also note that the Jones Act is unavailable to a longshoreman in a suit against the shipowner, who is not his employer, Kyles v. James W. Elwell & Co., 296 F. 2d 703 (7 Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 369 U.S. 852, 82 S.Ct. 936, 8 L.Ed.2d 10 (1962). Since the passage of the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 901 et seq., the Jones Act generally is unavailable to a longshoreman in a suit against his stevedore-employer, Swanson…