Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Mooney v. American Mail Line, Ltd.
Citations: 377 P.2d 429; 61 Wash. 2d 181; 1963 Wash. LEXIS 424Docket: 36258
Court: Washington Supreme Court; January 3, 1963; Washington; State Supreme Court
On December 2, 1958, plaintiff Owen D. Mooney, employed as a seaman on the SS India Mail, suffered injuries while performing his duties removing soiled linen bags. He tripped over a burner lead hose that was lying on the floor of a passageway after it had been jerked by an unknown source. Mooney sued his employer, American Mail Line, Ltd., as well as Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging Company, Inc., and Fraser's Boiler Service, Inc., the subcontractor responsible for boiler repairs. After Mooney presented part of his evidence, the defendants agreed to a settlement, and the case was continued for the court to determine liability. The court found that the burner lead belonged to Fraser and was improperly left on the floor by its employees, who were using it in the ship's engine room. It concluded that Fraser's negligence was the sole cause of Mooney's injuries, absolving the other defendants of liability. Fraser appealed, arguing that the court's finding was speculative, as there was no clear evidence on how the lead was jerked, that it was secured in a manner that made jerking unlikely, and that other individuals could have caused the incident. The court, however, noted that a trial court's judgment can be upheld if supported by any theory in the pleadings. Mooney's complaint indicated that Fraser was negligent for leaving the leads in a tripping position without adequate protection. Evidence showed that Fraser's employees typically secured such leads overhead when possible, and they were aware of the risk posed to individuals on the ship. The court ruled that regardless of how the lead was jerked, the resulting harm was foreseeable and could have been prevented had Fraser's employees adhered to their customary safety practices. Consequently, the court affirmed the judgment against Fraser for Mooney's injuries.