Jones Act Maritime Lawyer : Houston Jones Act & Maritime Injury Lawyer & Attorney : Arnold & Itkin Law Firm : Offshore Injury, Maritime Law : Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida

In a recent unpublished decision, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, considered whether an injured worker was in fact a "seaman" for admiralty law purposes.  The issue was contested by a defendant who asserted that it was entitled to a jury trial because the plaintiff sued strictly under state common and statutory law.

The plaintiff was injured aboard the vessel Hercules while the vessel rested within a protected boat slip, yet on navigable waters.  The injury occurred during testing of rigging designed and manufactured by the defendant in preparation for a project to lift some 2,000 tons on-site in the Gulf of Mexico.

Two lifts were performed successfully, but certain rigging equipment failed during a third lift.  Debris was scattered, causing injury to the plaintiff's hand and leg.

Immediately before trial in the subsequent personal injury suit, the plaintiff settled with his employer.  The defendant rigging manufacturer then demanded a jury trial.  This raised the issue whether the plaintiff's activity at the time of injury was so closely related to activity traditionally subject to admiralty jurisdiction that admiralty law should apply, with the result that no jury trial right would exist.

The court ruled that this was the case.  The incident that gave rise to the plaintiff's injury was not merely "fortuitously and incidentally connected" to admiralty in such a way that it bore no relationship to traditional maritime activity.  Rather, the court said, the injuries alleged by the employee fell within the type that occurred in maritime settings.  Specifically, the plaintiff's employer was testing a rigging device constructed by the manufacturer for use in anticipated offshore lifts.  That intended use was clearly known to the manufacturer, namely that its product was intended for offshore rather than land-based lifting.

Thus the plaintiff was a "seaman," the court had jurisdiction over all claims pursuant to the Jones Act and the General Maritime Law, and no jury trial was warranted.

The court went on to conclude that the plaintiff suffered some $1.9 million in damages due to his maritime personal injury during the failed rigging test.

To discuss a case with an experienced maritime lawyer, contact a maritime attorney online at Arnold & Itkin LLP, or call the maritime law office of Arnold & Itkin LLP toll free at 866-222-2606.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A seaman in Galveston, Texas filed a maritime injury lawsuit against a marine company for injuries he sustained while working aboard a ship. The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the company failed to adhere to maritime laws applying to the rights of seamen.

Morgan Whittington was working on board the Miss Sally when a collision with other barges knocked him into a wall. The impact of the collision caused an ice box to fall on top of him, leaving him with back, neck, hand and leg injuries. The lawsuit claims that as a result of the accident, Whittington, in addition to foregoing any earning capacity he had in the days since the accident, has lost the capacity to work in the future. The lawsuit, filed in the Galveston County District Court, blames Breathwit Marine Contractors Ltd. for failing to secure the box. Whittington claims that the company has failed to pay his medical bills and also accuses the company of violating maritime laws.

Seaman Rights

The rights of a seaman in the event of an accident are additional to the rights entitled to them under the Jones Act. When an accident occurs while the seaman is engaged in duty aboard a vessel, medical expenses including: hospitalization, medication, access to medical equipment and a doctor are the responsibility of the employer. This responsibility is unconditional. The seaman is also entitled to benefits from the employer related to meeting daily living expenses such as: food and grocery bills, utility bills etc. These benefits, along with the medical benefits seamen are entitled to, are collectively referred to as maintenance and cure benefits. These, however, automatically end when a seaman is declared to have reached Maximum Medical Improvement or MMI. Maximum Medical Improvement refers to a stage in which a person is deemed to have reached a healing plateau where no additional amount of medication or treatment can improve the existing condition.   In Whittington's case, winning the benefits that he is entitled to will involve proving that he has not reached MMI and that the employer's responsibility to pay his medical bills as well as maintenance of his day-to-day living expenses, still applies.

Many times, employers refuse to pay out rightful benefits, delay payments, or pay out fewer benefits than the worker is entitled to. Negotiating these benefits can be difficult when a worker lacks knowledge not only of his own rights, but also knowledge of the employer's responsibilities. That is where an experienced maritime attorney comes in – to make sure that a seaman receives the compensation to which he is entitled.

The maritime accident lawyers at Arnold & Itkin LLP are dedicated to providing Texas seamen with expert representation that results in a fair settlement. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident at sea, contact a maritime injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The last remnants of a dilapidated and unseaworthy vessel, the jack-up oil rig Zeus, that had been left standing in the Freeport channel south of Houston, Texas, have finally been removed, putting an end to two years of concerns over maritime pollution and the potential for injuries that could occur as a result of the toppling of the giant structure.

Early in November, Kevin Hoot Construction Co. the company that won the bid to remove the structure completed the final stages of the removal, pulling out the last of the rig's one million pound feet from the sea bed. The feet of the rig are already on their way to junkyards across the state, where they will be cut up to be sold as scrap. A decision on where the rig, a Freeport landmark will finally be laid to rest is yet to be taken. The Zeus Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) had been left standing in the channel, for over 17 years. In 2004, the platform was sold to Sanship Inc. for a sum of$1. For years before that, the 190-feet-tall rig has acted as a beacon for fisherman and jetties, and has been a much-loved part of the Freeport skyline.  Its tearing down has been an emotional experience for most residents. 

The platform would have been left standing for much longer, if it hadn't been for the fact that port officials noticed it was leaking pollutants into the water about two years ago. Soon after, the US Coast guard expressed its apprehension that a tornado or hurricane could cause the structure to collapse, blocking off the mouth of the channel. The owner Emilio Sanchez, was ordered to get the structure dismantled, and when he refused, the Texas Land Office was entrusted with the task of tearing down the platform.

The project was extremely hazardous in nature, and required at least two weeks of preliminary ground work just to make it safe enough for the maritime workers to get up on the rig. Zeus' massive bulk, coupled with its heavily rusted framework made workers extremely susceptible to maritime injuries, but the project was executed successfully. Most of the structure was torn down in time to avoid a possible collapse under the onslaught of Hurricane Ike, which tore through the Texas coastline just a couple of months later. The feet of the rig were the last to go, dug out and dismantled in November.

The giant rig will be missed by Freeport residents, especially its fishing community, but there's no doubt that a major environmental and maritime injury hazard has been eliminated now that the Zeus has finally been laid to rest.

Unseaworthy vessels threaten safety of maritime workers

Unseaworthy vessels like the Zeus jack-up drilling rig can be a serious hazard to maritime workers who operate, maintain, or in the case of the Zeus, demolish them. When the Zeus was operational, maritime workers having a permanent connection to its operation and maintenance would have qualified as Jones Act seamen and been protected under the Jones Act statute. But because the rig is no longer operational, workers in charge of dismantling it would not likely qualify for protection under the Jones Act. They would however likely qualify for benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act.  The LHWCA provides workers' compensation benefits for maritime workers who are not seamen such as the construction workers involved in the demolition of the Zeus.

Questions about Jones Act Seaman status

Seaman status under the Jones Act is a complex and highly debated topic. Fortunately the Jones Act isn't the only statute that provides protection and benefits for injured maritime workers and their families. If you have been injured in a maritime accident offshore or inshore, a maritime lawyer can help you understand what options you may have under the available statutes for claiming compensation. Contact a maritime lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free initial consultation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link