## Facts

- Kenward was a fare-paying passenger on the steamship *Admiral Peoples* traveling from Wilmington, California, to Portland, Oregon.
- At Portland, the vessel provided a gangplank leading from the ship to the dock for passengers to leave the vessel.
- The libel alleged the gangplank was placed so that it sloped from the ship toward the dock at about a 10–15 degree angle.
- The gangplank was alleged to be approximately two feet wide and eighteen feet long.
- It was equipped with rope railings that terminated about three feet short of each end.
- The shore end of the gangplank was alleged to be about six inches above the dock level, creating a step down from the plank to the dock.
- According to the libel, acting on instructions from one of the vessel’s officers, Kenward proceeded along the gangplank and, upon reaching its lower end, fell because she was unaware of the step and received no warning.
- She fell from the shore end of the gangplank onto the dock and was injured.
- The libel in rem alleged negligence in (1) failing to provide railings extending to the shore end, (2) failing to have the plank flush with the dock or tapered to dock level, and (3) failing to warn of the step.
- The respondent filed an exception to the libel arguing the claim was outside admiralty jurisdiction because the injury occurred on land; the district court dismissed the libel, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed (73 F.2d 170).
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari (294 U.S. 702) to address an asserted conflict in the lower courts’ decisions on admiralty jurisdiction in similar settings.

## Issues

1. Whether a personal-injury claim is within federal admiralty tort jurisdiction when a passenger falls from the shore end of a ship’s gangplank and lands on the dock.
2. Whether the gangplank used as the means of going to and from the vessel is treated as part of the ship for purposes of the locality rule in admiralty tort jurisdiction.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s judgment affirming dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.
- The Court held that the gangplank, as used here to enable passengers to leave the vessel, was part of the ship.
- Because the alleged negligent condition and failures concerned the ship’s gangplank (a ship’s appurtenance), the claim stated a maritime tort within admiralty jurisdiction even though the passenger’s fall carried her onto the dock.

## Legal Principles

- Admiralty tort jurisdiction traditionally turns on the locality of the wrong and generally does not cover injuries to persons or property on land when the cause of action arises on land.
- Borderline settings require careful classification of where the wrongful condition or act occurred and what instrumentality caused the injury.
- A gangplank furnished by a vessel for passenger use in boarding and leaving the vessel may be treated as a part of the ship (an appurtenance) for jurisdictional purposes.
- When the alleged negligence relates to the condition, placement, equipment, or warnings associated with the ship’s gangplank, the tort may be maritime even if the injured person ultimately lands on the dock.

## Conclusion

*The Admiral Peoples* holds that a passenger’s injury sustained while leaving a vessel over its gangplank may be pursued in admiralty because the gangplank is treated as part of the ship, making the alleged wrong maritime in location and character despite the final impact occurring on the dock.


*The Admiral Peoples*, 295 U.S. 649 (1935)

The Admiral Peoples, 295 U.S. 649 (1935)