Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Atlantic Transport Company Of West Virginia v. Imbrovek

• 1913 • 234 U.S. 52 • White Court
In the case of Atlantic Transport Company of West Virginia v. Imbrovek, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Imbrovek, a worker who was injured while working on an unseaworthy vessel owned by Atlantic Transport Company. The court held that under maritime law, a shipowner has an absolute duty to ensure their vessels are seaworthy and safe for workers. This obligation is not delegable or excusable due to negligence or any other reason. Therefore, even though Imbrovek knew about the unsafe...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1913
Docket: 215
234 U.S. 52
34 S. Ct. 733
58 L. Ed. 1208
1914 U.S. LEXIS 1184
Argued: Jan 29, 1914

Atlantic Transport Company Of West Virginia v. Imbrovek

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Atlantic Transport Company of West Virginia v. Imbrovek, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Imbrovek, a worker who was injured while working on an unseaworthy vessel owned by Atlantic Transport Company. The court held that under maritime law, a shipowner has an absolute duty to ensure their vessels are seaworthy and safe for workers. This obligation is not delegable or excusable due to negligence or any other reason. Therefore, even though Imbrovek knew about the unsafe conditions but continued to work without protest (assumption of risk), he could still recover damages from his employer because they had breached their non-delegable duty towards him as a seaman.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Atlantic Transport Company of West Virginia v. Imbrovek, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold a ship owner liable for damages caused by an unseaworthy vessel contradicted previous rulings and maritime law principles. The dissent emphasized that liability should only be imposed if there is proof of negligence on part of the ship owner or its agents in maintaining seaworthiness, which wasn't established in this case. They contended that imposing such strict liability would unjustly burden ship owners and potentially disrupt maritime commerce. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "unseaworthiness," arguing it was too broad and could include minor defects not affecting a vessel’s overall fitness for sea travel.

Opinion written by Justice CEHughes(1)
Decided: May 25, 1914
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms