ADMIRALTY-DURATION OF DUTY TO PROVIDE MAINTENANCE AND CURE

Authors

R. B. Barnett, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Libelant, while employed as engineer on a vessel operated by the United States, suffered a heart attack. He was paid maintenance and cure from May 31, 1946, when he was discharged from the hospital, until May 26, 1947. This action was brought to recover maintenance and cure from that date until March 25, 1951, when he returned to work, less two periods during which he had been employed for 60 and 93 days. Since April 1947, libelant had received treatment consisting of sedatives and medications designed to relieve chest pains and other discomforts. It was acknowledged there had been little physiological improvement in the damaged heart tissue since shortly after the original attack. Held, recovery for libelant, since any treatment which relieved him of physical pain and attendant mental anguish under the circumstances was "curative" even though the damage to the heart might never be further repaired. Gibson v. United States, (D.C. Pa. 1951) 100 F. Supp. 954.

Recommended Citation

R. B. Barnett, ADMIRALTY-DURATION OF DUTY TO PROVIDE MAINTENANCE AND CURE, 50 Mich. L. Rev. 1093 (1952).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol50/iss7/9