Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

warranty of seaworthiness

Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court

Definitions from Case Law

From 321 U.S. 96 - Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co. · 1944Most cited · 1,417 citing opinions

the vessel and owner are liable to indemnify a seaman for injury caused by unseaworthiness of the vessel or its appurtenant appliances and equipment

How the Supreme Court has restated “warranty of seaworthiness”

1931194019501959 most cited: 321 U.S. 96 - Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co. (1944)
first stateddeparted

Each Supreme Court definition of “warranty of seaworthiness,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.

How often courts cite the cases defining “warranty of seaworthiness”

19301940196019802000202020301.1k

Court decisions citing the 5 opinions that defined “warranty of seaworthiness” — 3,127 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.

All 6 definitions, chronological · 1931–1959

  1. ORIGINAL

    extends to unseaworthiness of the ship due to faulty stowage of cargo, even though the charterer himself, subject to supervision of the captain, loads the vessel; applies only to the ship and such equipment as is called for by the charter party

  2. The warranty of seaworthiness is implied from the circumstances of the parties and the subject-matter of the contract and may be negatived only by express covenant. It is as much a part of the contract as any express stipulation.

  3. Applied to a seaman, such a warranty is, not that the seaman is competent to meet all contingencies; but that he is equal in disposition and seamanship to the ordinary men in the calling.

    crew

  4. The warranty of seaworthiness is a species of liability without fault. It does not mean that the ship can weather all storms. It merely means that 'the vessel is reasonably fit to carry the cargo.' If it is not, the owner is liable, irrespective of any fault on his part.

  5. 1959·361 U.S. 118 - West v. United States[p6]· cited 621×

    the focus should be upon the status of the ship, the pattern of the repairs, and the extensive nature of the work contracted to be done, rather than the specific type of work that each of the numerous shore-based workmen is doing on shipboard at the moment of injury.