Connection lost
Server error
Federal Marine Terminals, Inc. v. Burnside Shipping Co. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A stevedore paid workers’ compensation for a deceased longshoreman and sued the negligent shipowner directly to recover its costs. The Court held the stevedore’s statutory subrogation right is not exclusive and recognized a direct tort action against the shipowner for breaching its duty of care.
Legal Significance: Established that a stevedore has a direct cause of action in tort against a shipowner, independent of statutory subrogation, to recover compensation payments caused by the shipowner’s negligence. This created a new, non-statutory remedy in maritime law.
Federal Marine Terminals, Inc. v. Burnside Shipping Co. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
A longshoreman employed by Federal Marine Terminals, Inc. (Marine Terminals), a stevedoring contractor, was killed when he fell through an unguarded deep tank opening on a vessel owned by Burnside Shipping Co. (Burnside). Burnside’s crew had created the hazardous opening. As a result, Marine Terminals became liable for approximately $70,000 in compensation payments to the longshoreman’s dependents under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA). The wrongful death action brought by the longshoreman’s estate against Burnside was subject to a $30,000 state statutory cap. Because its statutory right of subrogation to the estate’s claim was insufficient to cover its full liability, Marine Terminals filed a counterclaim against Burnside. It asserted a direct action in tort to recover the full amount of its compensation liability, alleging Burnside’s negligence in failing to provide a safe place to work created the dangerous condition that caused the death. The lower courts dismissed the counterclaim, holding that the subrogation remedy provided in § 33 of the LHWCA was the stevedore’s exclusive remedy against the shipowner.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does federal maritime law permit a stevedoring contractor to bring a direct tort action against a shipowner to recover compensation payments made to an employee whose injury was caused by the shipowner’s negligence, or is the stevedore’s remedy limited to statutory subrogation under the LHWCA?
Yes. The Court held that the statutory subrogation remedy in § 33 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Exc
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does federal maritime law permit a stevedoring contractor to bring a direct tort action against a shipowner to recover compensation payments made to an employee whose injury was caused by the shipowner’s negligence, or is the stevedore’s remedy limited to statutory subrogation under the LHWCA?
Conclusion
This case established a significant, non-statutory remedy in maritime law, allowing a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation
Legal Rule
Under federal maritime law, a shipowner owes a direct duty of reasonable Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est labo
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court's analysis proceeded in two parts. First, it determined that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The subrogation remedy under § 33 of the LHWCA is not