Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

248 U.S. 457

Coon v. Kennedy

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued December 11, 1918.

Decided January 13, 1919.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1919-01-13

<p>ERROR TO THE COURT OP ERRORS AND APPEALS OP THE STATE OP NEW JERSEY.</p> <p>The cáse is stated in the opinion.</p>

Cited by 5 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1921

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“the validity of a statute of,, or an authority exercised under any State, on the ground of their being repugnant 'to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United Statés.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Davis

“the validity of a treaty or statute of, or an authority exercised ' under the United States”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Davis

Relies on Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen · Coon v. Kennedy

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · 9–0 · Decided 1919-01-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ERROR TO THE COURT OP ERRORS AND APPEALS OP THE STATE OP NEW JERSEY.

¶2Under Jud. Code, § 237, as amended September 6,1916, a writ oferror does not lie to a judgment of a state court holding the state Workmen’s Compensation Law inapplicable to a case of personal injuries governed by the maritime law and holding the Act of October 6, 1917, which changes the rule in that regard, inapplicable retrospectively.

¶3Writ of error to review 91 N. J. L. 598, dismissed.

¶4The cáse is stated in the opinion.

¶5Mr. James D. Carpenter, Jr., for plaintiff in error.

¶6Mr. Isidor Kalisch for defendant in error.

¶7Memorandum opinion by

¶8Mr. Justice McReynolds.

¶9This writ of error runs to a judgment of the Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey filed March 11, 1918, 91 N. J. L. 598, denying relief to Rebecca Coon who *458sued to recover under the New Jersey Workmen’s Compensation Act on. account of her husband’s death by drowning in the navigable waters of that State whik employed as a fireman on a tug boat.

¶10The court held that as the accident occurred August 4, 1915, the Act of Congress approved October 6,1917, c. 97, 40 Stat. 395, “saving ... to claimants the rights and remedies under the workmen’s compensation law of any State” was inapplicable, and that under the doctrine announced in Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 244 U. S. 205, the rights of the parties depended upon the maritime law of the United States.

¶11There was no decision against the validity of a treaty or statute of or an authority exercised under the United States, nor in favor of the validity of a statute of or an authority exercised under a State challenged because of repugnance to the Constitution, treaties or laws of the United States. Consequently, under the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, 39 Stat. 726, the writ of error was improperly sued out and must be

¶12Dismissed.

/248/us/457 · .json · Public domain