Supreme Court of the United States, 1953

Avondale Marine Ways, Inc. v. Henderson

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided November 16, 1953 · Douglas, Reed

346 U.S. 366; 74 S. Ct. 100; 98 L. Ed. 2d 77; 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2545 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Frank A. Bull argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Ashton Phelps, John W. Sims and Daniel Huttenbrauck., Melvin Richter argued the cause for the Deputy Commissioner, respondent. With him on the brief were Acting Solicitor General Stern, Assistant Attorney General Burger and Paul A. Sweeney.

Cases that cite this one

54 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 that cite it most often are listed here.

Clyde Flowers v. The Travelers Insurance Company (5th Cir. 1958)
O'leary v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dry Dock Company (9th Cir. 1965)
O'Leary v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dry Dock Co. (9th Cir. 1965)
McElheney v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Pa. 2008)
McElheney v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006)
Johnson v. Texas Employers Insurance Ass'n (Tex. App. 1977)
Marine Stevedoring Corp. v. Oosting (4th Cir. 1968)
The Travelers Insurance Company and Levingston Shipbuilding Company v. R. J. Shea, Deputy Commissioner, and James D. McCollough (5th Cir. 1967)
Holland v. Harrison Brothers Dry Dock And Repair Yard, Inc. (5th Cir. 1962)
Holland v. Harrison Bros. Dry Dock & Repair Yard, Inc. (5th Cir. 1962)
American Mutual Liability Insurance v. Neuman (United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama 1969)
Figueroa v. Marine Inspection Services, LLC (District Court, S.D. Texas 2014)
In re Carter (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2010)
Carter v. Allstate Insurance (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2010)
Vasquez Ex Rel. Bautista v. GMD Shipyard Corp. (2d Cir. 2009)
Carter v. Bisso Marine Co., Inc. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 2002)
CNA Ins. Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)
Saif Corporation v. Johnson (9th Cir. 1990)
SAIF Corp./Oregon Ship v. Johnson (9th Cir. 1990)
Terry D. Paprocki v. Dale Foltz (6th Cir. 1989)
Kenneth L. Titcomb v. Commonwealth of Virginia Judy Wyant (4th Cir. 1989)
Freeman v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1988)
St. Louis Shipbuilding Company v. Director Of The Office Of Workers' Compensation Programs (8th Cir. 1977)
St. Louis Shipbuilding Co. v. Director of Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (8th Cir. 1977)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

346 U.S. 366 (1953)

AVONDALE MARINE WAYS, INC.
v.
HENDERSON, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ET AL.

No. 44.

Supreme Court of United States.

Argued October 20, 1953.Decided November 9, 1953.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT.

Frank A. Bull argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Ashton Phelps, John W. Sims and Daniel Huttenbrauck.

Melvin Richter argued the cause for the Deputy Commissioner, respondent. With him on the brief were Acting Solicitor General Stern, Assistant Attorney General Burger and Paul A. Sweeney.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed. Davis v. Department of Labor, 317 U. S. 249; Kaiser Co. v. Baskin, 340 U. S. 886; Baskin v. Industrial Accident Commission, 338 U. S. 854; Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Moores, 335 U. S. 874.

MR. JUSTICE REED took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, concurring.

I do not think this case belongs in the "twilight zone" of Davis v. Department of Labor, 317 U. S. 249, 256. Recovery was allowed under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act for a death which occurred on a barge drawn up for repairs on a marine railway. Norton v. Vesta Coal Co., 63 F. 2d 165, was such *367 a case and Judge Woolley dissented from a holding that a marine railway was not included in the statutory language, "any dry dock."

As Judge Woolley explained, there are three kinds of dry docks. (1) A floating dry dock, as its name makes clear, floats on the water, the vessel resting on the bottom of the dry dock after the water has been removed. (2) A graven dry dock is dug into the land. The vessel floats in but rests on land once the water has been pumped out. (3) Finally there is the marine railway, on which the vessel is drawn out of the water, instead of the water being drawn away from the vessel. A ship is no more and no less on land when it rests in a graven dry dock than when it rests on a marine railway. The three types of dry docks are not different in kind; functionally they are the same. And I see no basis for concluding that Congress treated one differently from the others for the purposes of this Act.

MR. JUSTICE BURTON concurs in the affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals but does so on the ground relied upon by that court and by the District Court. This was that the Deputy Commissioner, in making the award, acted within the terms of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 44 Stat. 1426, 33 U. S. C. § 903 (a), in that the decedent, at the time of receiving his fatal injury, was engaged in cleaning a tank of a barge located on the ways of a marine railway, by means of which the barge had been hauled out of the Mississippi River for repairs. They held that his death resulted "from an injury occurring upon the navigable waters of the United States (including any dry dock)" as those terms are used in such Act. Avondale Marine Ways v. Henderson, 201 F. 2d 437, following Maryland Casualty Co. v. Lawson, 101 F. 2d 732, and Continental Casualty Co. v. Lawson, 64 F. 2d 802.

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