green
Positive treatment
4.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1954 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1954
1990
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Clay v. Ensco Offshore Co.
See Drachenberg, 571 F.2d at 920 (noting that the Supreme Court has in effect found that a landfall runner, brought aboard by a stevedore company and attached to the ship only by way of one of the ship’s winches, was an appurtenance of the vessel) (citing Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954) (per curiam)).
cited
Cited "see"
Capitol Industries-Emi, Inc. v. William M. Bennett, Kenneth Cory, Richard Silberman, Individually and Asmembers Of, and Martin Huff, Individually, and as Executive Officer Of, Thefranchise Tax Board, State of California, Emi Limited v. William M. Bennett, Kenneth Cory, Richard Silberman, Individually and Asmembers Of, and Martin Huff, Individually and as Executive Officer Of, Thefranchise Tax Board, State of California
See George F. Alger Co. v. Peck, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 605 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954).
cited
Cited "see"
Capitol Industries-EMI, Inc. v. Bennett
See George F. Alger Co. v. Peck, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 605 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954).
cited
Cited "see"
Jack W. Walker v. John J. Gilligan, Governor
See, Alger v. Peck, 119 F.Supp. 812 (S.D.Ohio, 1954), aff’d per curiam, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 853 , 98 L.Ed. 1148 .
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph Chagois, Cross-Appellant v. Lykes Bros. Steamship Company, Inc., Cross-Appellee
See Rogers v. United States Lines, 1954, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 , rev'g 3 Cir. 1953, 205 F.2d 57 ; Alaska S.S.
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph Chagois, Cross-Appellant v. Lykes Bros. Steamship Company, Inc., Cross-Appellee
See Rogers *395 v. United States Lines, 1954, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 , rev’g 3 Cir. 1953, 205 F.2d 57 ; Alaska S.S.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bommarito v. Belle Chasse Marine Trans
Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of Cleveland, Ohio, 409 U.S. 249, 255 (1972). 9 See Alaska Steamship Co. v. Petterson, 347 U.S. 396, 396 (1954) (affirming per curiam a Ninth Circuit opinion, 205 F.2d 478 (9th Cir. 1953), allowing seaworthiness recovery to stevedore injured by breaking block owned and brought on board by stevedoring company); see also Rogers v. U.S. Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 984 (1954) (reversing per curiam a Third Circuit opinion, 205 F.2d 57 (3d Cir. 1953), denying seaworthiness recovery to longshoreman on basis that land fall runner belonging to stevedore was not appurtenant to vesse…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hamilton v. MARINE CARRIERS CORPORATION
See also, Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954). 11 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
William Norfleet and David Lane v. Isthmian Lines, Inc., Isthmian Lines, Inc., and Third-Party v. Whitehall Terminal Corporation, Third-Party
See also, Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954); Alaska S.S.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hubert Reid, Libelant-Appellee v. Quebec Paper Sales & Transportation Company, Limited and Donnacona Paper Company, Limited v. William Spencer & Son Corp., Respondent-Impleaded
See Grillea v. United States, 232 F.2d 919 (2 Cir. 1956); see also Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954) and Alaska Steamship Co., Inc. v. Petterson, 347 U.S. 396 , 74 S.Ct. 601 , 98 L.Ed. 798 (1954) (to the effect that when a stevedore brings aboard the ship defective equipment which causes an accident the ship is made unseaworthy).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reid v. Quebec Paper Sales & Transportation Co.
See Grillea v. United States, 232 F.2d 919 (2 Cir. 1956); see also Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 (1954) and Alaska Steamship Co., Inc. v. Petterson, 347 U.S. 396 , 74 S.Ct. 601 , 98 L.Ed. 798 (1954) (to the effect that when a stevedore brings aboard the ship defective equipment which causes an accident the ship is made unseaworthy).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wyborski Ex Rel. Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Bristol City Line of Steamships, Ltd.
For instance, in the Petterson case, supra, the faulty appurtenance was in fact brought on board the ship by the stevedores, as also in the Casbon case, supra; see also Rogers v. United States Lines, 1954, 347 U.S. 984 , 74 S.Ct. 849 , 98 L.Ed. 1120 , per curiam reversal of 3d Circuit, 205 F.2d 57 ; Crumady v. The J.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc.
(2×)
See also Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U. S. 984 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United New York & New Jersey Sandy Hook Pilots Ass'n v. Halecki
(2×)
See also Alaska S. S. Co. v. Petterson, 347 U. S. 396 , and Rogers v. United States Lines, 347 U. S. 984 . [6] It was established that the ship's own ventilating system was entirely adequate to perform its intended function of ventilating the engine room while the ship was in regular operation. [7] We do not reach the question, discussed in the amicus curiae brief of the United States, whether a shipowner can ever-be liable for the unseaworthiness of a vessel "to a shore-based worker who performs labor on a ship which is not ready for a voyage but is out of navigation and docked in a private s…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rogers
v.
United States Lines
v.
United States Lines
No. 471.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 1, 1954.
Abraham E. Freedman, Charles Lakatos and William M. Alper for petitioner., Thomas E. Byrne, Jr. and Mark D. Alspach for respondent.
Cited by 89 opinions | Published
Per Curiam:
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed. Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Jackson, and Mr. Justice Burton dissent, adhering to the views expressed in their dissent in Alaska Steamship Co. v. Petterson, 347 U. S. 396.