SUMMARY JUDGMENT AFFIRMED WHERE SHIP OWNER HAD NO DUTY TO SUPERVISE THE STEVEDORE OPERATIONS AND TERMINAL OPERATOR DID NOT BREACH ANY DUTY OF CARE.
NATHANIEL GOLDSMITH, Appellant v. SWAN REEFER A.S. and DEL MONTE FRESH PRODUCE N.A., INC.
No. 05-2023
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 8577
April 6, 2006, Filed
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff longshoreman appealed from an order of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granting summary judgment in favor of defendant ship owner with respect to the longshoreman's negligence claim under the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act (LHWCA), 33 U.S.C.S. § 901 et seq., and also granting summary judgment in favor of defendant terminal operator with respect to a general maritime negligence claim.
OVERVIEW: The longshoreman was injured when a crane that was unloading cargo from a ship caused a container to hit the longshoreman and knock him overboard. The longshoreman, who was employed by the stevedore company that was hired to do the unloading, sued both the ship owner and the terminal operator. As to the ship owner, the longshoreman contended that it breached its duty to intervene under 33 U.S.C.S. § 905(b) because it knew or should have known that the stevedore's practice of unloading with two cranes was dangerous. The court affirmed the district court's holding that the ship owner did not have a general duty under § 905(b) to supervise the stevedore operations. Nor did the ship owner's contract with the stevedore impose a duty to safeguard the longshoremen in the performance of their duties. As to the terminal operator, the court also found that there was no breach of any duty of care. The accident in this case appeared to have been caused by listing that resulted from improper timing of the cranes, something within the stevedore's control, not the terminal operator's. There was simply no evidence that the terminal operator failed to exercise reasonable care.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the order granting summary judgment in favor of both the ship owner and the terminal operator.
