Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Joseph F. Gardner v. Sinclair Refining Co., 227 F.2d 958, 3rd Cir. (1955)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views1 page
    The document is a court case from 1955 in which Joseph F. Gardner sued Sinclair Refining Co. for maintenance and cure. The district court had awarded Gardner maintenance and cure for the full period in question. Sinclair Refining appealed, arguing Gardner refused hospital care and treatment during part of that period. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding the district court judge properly determined Gardner's failure to seek medical help was not willful and did not warrant forfeiture of his right to maintenance and cure based on the evidence presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1955-12-23 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 227 F.2d 958 Docket: 11683_1

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court case from 1955 in which Joseph F. Gardner sued Sinclair Refining Co. for maintenance and cure. The district court had awarded Gardner maintenance and cure for the full period in question. Sinclair Refining appealed, arguing Gardner refused hospital care and treatment during part of that period. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding the district court judge properly determined Gardner's failure to seek medical help was not willful and did not warrant forfeiture of his right to maintenance and cure based on the evidence presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views1 page

    Joseph F. Gardner v. Sinclair Refining Co., 227 F.2d 958, 3rd Cir. (1955)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case from 1955 in which Joseph F. Gardner sued Sinclair Refining Co. for maintenance and cure. The district court had awarded Gardner maintenance and cure for the full period in question. Sinclair Refining appealed, arguing Gardner refused hospital care and treatment during part of that period. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding the district court judge properly determined Gardner's failure to seek medical help was not willful and did not warrant forfeiture of his right to maintenance and cure based on the evidence presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    227 F.

    2d 958

    Joseph F. GARDNER
    v.
    SINCLAIR REFINING CO., Appellant.
    No. 11683.

    United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.


    Argued Dec. 6, 1955.
    Decided Dec. 23, 1955.

    Joseph J. Murphy, Philadelphia, Pa., (Mark D. Alspach, John A.


    Friedrich, Krusen, Evans & Shaw, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for
    appellant.
    Milton M. Borowsky, Philadelphia, Pa., (Abraham E. Freedman,
    Freedman, Landy & Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
    Before McLAUGHLIN, KALODNER and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    In this maintenance and cure case appellant objects to a part of the award on the
    ground that the particular time it covers was a period during which the seaman
    refused to avail himself of hospital care and treatment. The trial court who saw
    and heard the seaman found that his failure to seek medical assistance on the
    specified occasion was not wilful and that his actions were not of such nature as
    to warrant a forfeiture of his right to maintenance and cure. The record bears
    out the correctness of this conclusion. $The judgment of district court will be
    affirmed. D.C., 129 F.Supp. 225.

    You might also like