Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co.
281 U.S. 128 (1930)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Nogueira v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 281 U.S. 128 (1930)

Nogueira v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company

No. 248

Argued February 28, 1930

Decided April 14, 1930

281 U.S. 128

Syllabus

N. was injured while employed by a railroad company as one of a gang of freight handler in loading freight into railroad car on a car float lying in navigable waters at a pier. The float was a vessel

Page 281 U. S. 129

of 500 tons belonging to the company and was used in the transportation of such cars. The injury occurred on the float while N. was handling a piece of interstate freight.

Held:

1. That the car float, being in navigable waters, was subject to the maritime law like any other vessel. P. 281 U. S. 134.

2. Since the injury was within the exclusive admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, a recovery for it through workmen's compensation proceedings could not validly be provided by state law. Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen,24 U. S. 205. Id.

3. The case is governed by the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, which prescribes exclusively the liability of employer where employees engaged in maritime employment suffer disability or death from injuries occurring upon the navigable waters of the United States and recovery through workmen's compensation proceedings may not validly be provided by state law, and which excepts the master and members of the crew of any vessel and persons engaged by the master to load or unload or repair any vessel under eighteen tons net, but makes no exception of railroad employees engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. Pp. 281 U. S. 131, 281 U. S. 134, et seq.

32 F.2d 179 affirmed.

Certiorari, 280 U.S. 541, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals affirming a judgment dismissing the complaint in an action under the federal Employers' Liability Act.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.