Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1931

Maia v. Lamport & Holt, Ltd.

Maia v. Lamport & Holt, Ltd.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided July 24, 1931
141 Misc. 140; 252 N.Y.S. 201; 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1614

Counsel

Wollman & Wollman [Henry Wollman and Aaron B. Coleman of counsel], for the appellant., Isador Leifer, for the respondent.

Maia v. Lamport & Holt, Ltd.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Judgment and order unanimously reversed upon the law, with costs and taxable disbursements, and complaint dismissed with appropriate costs in the court below.

Plaintiff has recovered a judgment based upon a tort which occurred on a British vessel in the territorial waters of Brazil. The recovery was predicated upon the negligence of a fellow-servant of the plaintiff. The “ Jones Act ” (U. S. Code, tit. 46, § 688) is inapplicable. There was neither allegation nor proof, and it may not be presumed, that a similar statute existed either in Great Britain or Brazil. The burden of estabhshing such laws was upon the plaintiff. (Christie v. Cerro de Pasco Copper Corp., 214 App. Div. 820; affd., 243 N. Y. 557; Cuba R. R. Co. v. Crosby, 222 U. S. 473; Mexican Cent. R. Co. v. Chantry, 136 Fed. 316.)

All concur; present, Cropsey, MacCrate and Lewis, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.