Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
PALERMO v. LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC., 1957 — 355 U.S. 20 · caselaw · US
Torts · MBE-tested
PALERMO v. LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC.
355 U.S. 202 L. Ed. 2d 3·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
[For memorandum of Mr. Justice Harlan, joined by Mr. Justice Burton and Mr. Justice Whittaker, see ante, p. 19.]
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
PALERMO v. LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC.
No. 350.
Decided October 21, 1957.
Philip F. Di Costanzo for petitioner.
Eugene Underwood and William M. Kimball for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The petition for certiorari is granted, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case is remanded. We hold that the trial court did not commit reversible error in refusing to charge respondent’s request No. 12. The petitioner’s alleged choice of a more dangerous route did not, under the proofs, operate to bar recovery as a matter of law. The jury was properly instructed that the petitioner’s negligence, if any, was to be considered in mitigation of damages under the rule applicable in actions for personal injuries arising from maritime torts. Poye & Talbot, Inc., v. Hawn, 346 U. S. 406, 408-409; cf. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. Smith, 305 U. S. 424.
For reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U. S. 500, 524, Mr. Justice Frankfurter is of the view that the writ of certiorari is improvidently granted.
[For memorandum of Mr. Justice Harlan, joined by Mr. Justice Burton and Mr. Justice Whittaker, see ante, p. 19.]
[Amended, post, p. 910, to provide for remand of the case to the Court of Appeals.]