Page:Alart Associates v. Aptaker (402 F.2d 779).pdf/2

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
ALART ASSOCIATES, INC. v. APTAKER
Cite as 402 F.2d 779 (1968)
779

covery for injuries allegedly sustained in the course of their employment as federal employees aboard the SS CRISTOBAL, a vessel owned and operated by the Panama Canal Company, a wholly-owned agency and instrumentality of the United States. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the Government and dismissed the complaints on the ground that the exclusive remedy of the appellants against the United States was under the Federal Employees Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. § 751 et seq.[1]

Our decision in this case is controlled by decisions of the Supreme Court and prior decisions of this court which we consider to be clearly dispositive of the issue presented. These decisions compel the conclusion that a seaman who was injured in the course of his employment as a federal employee of the Panama Canal Company, a federal instrumentality, is limited to the benefits provided under the terms of the Federal Employees Compensation Act and, therefore, such seaman may not maintain a suit for damages against the Government. Johansen v. United States, 343 U.S. 427, 72 S.Ct. 849, 96 L.Ed. 1051 (Public Vessels Act); Patterson v. United States, 359 U.S. 495, 79 S.Ct. 936, 3 L.Ed.2d 971, (Suits in Admiralty Act); Jarvis v. United States, 342 F.2d 799 (C.A. 5), affirming Petition of United States, 212 F.Supp. 214 (E.D.La.), cert. den. 382 U.S. 831, 86 S.Ct. 70, 15 L.Ed.2d 75 (Suits in Admiralty Act); Suhar v. United States, 351 F.2d 952 (C.A. 5) (general maritime law); Aho v. United States, 374 F.2d 885 (C.A. 5), cert. den. 389 U.S. 930, 88 S.Ct. 292, 19 L.Ed.2d 282 (libel in admiralty). The Johansen and Patterson decisions have been reaffirmed recently. Amell v. United States, 384 U.S. 158 at 160–161, 86 S.Ct. 1384, 16 L.Ed.2d 445; United States v. Demko, 385 U.S. 149, at 151–152, 87 S.Ct. 382, 17 L.Ed.2d 258.

The judgment is affirmed.

ALART ASSOCIATES, INC., Plaintiff, and Counter-claim Defendant-Appellee,

v.

Cy APTAKER and Preview Distributors, Inc., Defendants, Counter-claimants, and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

Alvin G. BLUMBERG, Third-Party Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 127, 128, Dockets 32395, 32396.

United States Court of Appeals
Second Circuit.

Argued Oct. 8, 1968.

Decided Oct. 28, 1968.

  1. By statute the section designations have been changed to 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.