Diniero v. United States Lines Co.

185 F. Supp. 818 (S.D.N.Y. 1960) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · June 27, 1960

Summary

The court awarded a seaman maintenance and cure for the period after he was marked fit for duty, concluding that his disabling back condition continued and that further medical improvement remained possible. It awarded $9,012 based on 1,239 days of maintenance at $8 per day, less wages earned, without interest before judgment.

Holdings

  1. A seaman's fit-for-duty designation does not bar maintenance and cure if the seaman in fact remains in pain, has not achieved maximum medical recovery, and further improvement remains medically possible.
  2. The plaintiff was entitled to maintenance through February 5, 1959, the date he was discharged from Bellevue as an outpatient receiving post-operative care.
  3. The plaintiff could not recover additional medical treatment expenses as part of the reserved maintenance-and-cure award because the evidence and jury instructions on those expenses had already been presented in the negligence and unseaworthiness claims and recovery was presumably included in the jury's verdict.
  4. The plaintiff was entitled to maintenance at $8 per day under the collective bargaining agreement, for 1,239 compensable days, reduced by approximately $900 in wages earned, resulting in an award of $9,012.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to maintenance and cure after being marked fit for duty by Marine hospitals.
  2. Whether the maintenance-and-cure obligation continued through the plaintiff's eventual surgery and post-operative recovery.
  3. Whether the plaintiff could recover separately for medical treatment expenses incurred after his discharge from Marine hospital care.
  4. What maintenance amount was recoverable, including deductions for periods of inpatient hospitalization and wages earned.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (5)

  • Koslusky v. United States, 208 F.2d 957, 959 (2d Cir. 1953)(followed)
  • Livanos v. National Bulk Carriers, 248 F.2d 815, 817 (2d Cir. 1957)(followed)
  • Bartholomew v. Universe Tankships, Inc., 279 F.2d 911 (2d Cir. 1960)(applied)
  • McCarthy v. American Eastern Corp., 175 F.2d 727, 729 (3d Cir. 1949)(applied)
  • Perez v. Suwanee S. S. Co., 239 F.2d 180, 181 (2d Cir. 1956)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…