JOHN W. GAITHER, APPELLANT,
v.
HUNTER MARINE TRANSPORT, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the appeal was timely filed and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
A deckhand sued his employer under the Jones Act for negligence and an unseaworthy vessel after being injured. The jury found in favor of the employer…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jones Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
John W. Gaither was injured while working as a deckhand on the M/Y Sarah G. Hunter on the Cumberland River. He filed suit under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688, alleging that Hunter Marine Transport, Inc. (Hunter) negligently failed to provide a safe place to work and that Hunter failed to provide a “seaworthy” vessel. Gaither sought compensatory and punitive damages. Hunter raised the affirmative defense of contributory negligence. The jury, by special interrogatory, returned a verdict in favor of Hunter, and the district court1 entered judgment accordingly. Gaither appeals. Hunter moves to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Because we hold Gaither’s appeal was timely filed, we deny Hunter’s motion to dismiss. After thoroughly reviewing the record and Gaither’s arguments, we conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict, and that the district court properly applied the law. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir.R. 47B.
. The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, United States District Judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri.