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

Young v. Steamship Company

• 1881 • 105 U.S. 41 • Waite Court
In Young v. Steamship Company, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a steamship company was liable for the death of a passenger who had been injured while on board the vessel. The passenger, William Young, had been injured while attempting to board the vessel and had subsequently died from his injuries. The steamship company argued that they were not liable for Young's death because they had taken all reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of their...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 Waite Court
Term: 1881
105 U.S. 41
26 L. Ed. 966
1881 U.S. LEXIS 2088
Argued: Jan 12, 1882

Young v. Steamship Company

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Young v. Steamship Company, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a steamship company was liable for the death of a passenger who had been injured while on board the vessel. The passenger, William Young, had been injured while attempting to board the vessel and had subsequently died from his injuries. The steamship company argued that they were not liable for Young's death because they had taken all reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of their passengers. The Supreme Court disagreed with the steamship company and held that they were liable for Young's death. The Court reasoned that the steamship company had a duty to provide a safe environment for its passengers and that they had failed to do so. The Court also noted that the steamship company had failed to take reasonable precautions to prevent the accident from occurring. As a result, the Court held that the steamship company was liable for Young's death and awarded damages to his estate.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Young v. Steamship Company, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would have a detrimental effect on maritime law. He argued that under existing admiralty law, seamen were entitled to wages for all time spent at sea regardless of whether or not they had been actively employed during those hours. The majority opinion held that seamen were only entitled to wages for active service and thus denied compensation for periods when no work was performed due to weather conditions or other circumstances beyond their control. Justice Field disagreed with this interpretation of maritime law, noting that it contradicted prior decisions which had recognized the right of seamen to receive full pay even if they did not perform any services during certain portions of their voyage. He further noted that such an interpretation could lead employers to take advantage of sailors by withholding payment whenever possible and thereby reduce their already meager earnings significantly.

Opinion written by Justice SJField
Decided: Mar 13, 1882
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