Florida Injury Lawyers Blog

INJURED SEA AND MARITIME WORKERS: KNOWING YOUR RIGHTS UNDER MARITIME INJURY LAW - Part III

Injured Seaman’s Entitlement to Maintenance and Cure

The first two blogs in this series discussed a seaman’s right to bring tort claims alleging: 1) negligence on the part of his employer under the Jones Act; and/or 2) against the owner of the vessel alleging that the vessel was unseaworthy. Of course, in many cases, the seaman’s employer is also the vessel’s owner.

An injured vessel worker who meets the definition of seaman, quite apart from any liability claims he may have under the Jones Act and/or the Doctrine of Unseaworthiness, is entitled to Maintenance and Cure if he was injured or becomes ill while in the service of the vessel. Through the years, the courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have held that maintenance refers to the right of an ill or injured seaman to meals and lodging [living allowance] comparable to that which he would have received aboard his vessel. Lewis v. Lewis Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U.S. 438, 441 (2001) citing Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor, 303 U.S. 525, 527-528 (1938). See also Vaughan v. Atkinson, 369 U.S. 527, 531 (1962).

Maritime law is a complex area and an injured seaman or maritime worker should consider seeking out an experienced maritime law attorney before settling any claim with an employer to discuss his potential avenues for compensation for his sustained injuries given the facts of his case. Maritime law attorneys will thoroughly evaluate the claimant’s case, and part of this evaluation will be to determine if the claimant has an action for maintenance and cure, as well as actions in tort.

Moreover, an employer and/or ship owner may well pay "maintenance and cure" monies and then offer to enter into a settlement agreement with the injured seaman. The injured seaman, perhaps already overwhelmed by his injuries and fear, may unknowingly accept a "low" settlement amount where he also agrees to not pursue any lawsuit even where the injuries were the result of employer negligence or vessel unseaworthiness. Rights (such as the right to bring a lawsuit) given up in a settlement agreement are usually lost forever. Before signing any settlement agreement with his employer and/or the ship's owner, the injured seaman should consult with a maritime law attorney to get a full understanding of the potential value of his injuries given the facts of his case.

The following discussion is provided to give some background on maintenance and cure in general and an update on recent case law.

Cure refers to employer’s payment of the injured seaman’s reasonable medical expenses related to the treatment of his injuries up until the seaman’s reaches the point of Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI) or is found to be fit for duty by his doctor. MMI does not mean that the seaman has fully recovered from his injuries or illness. Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor, 303 U.S. 525, 528 (1938) What it does mean is that any further improvement of the injured seaman’s medical condition will not be achievable through additional medical intervention. Once this point is reached, the injured seaman’s employer has no further obligation to pay medical expenses.

The original public policy behind the concept of “Maintenance and Cure” can perhaps best be summed up by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Story’s description of the life a seaman:

Seamen are by the perculiarity of their lives liable to sudden sickness from change of climate, exposure to perils, and exhausting labour. . . If some provision be not made for them in sickness at the expense of the ship, they must often in foreign ports suffer the accumulated evils of disease, and poverty, and sometimes perish from the want of suitable nourishment. . .If these expenses are a charge upon the ship, the interest of the owner will be immediately connected with that of the seamen. . . Even the merchant himself derives an ultimate benefit from what may at first seem an onerous charge. It encourages seamen to engage in perilous voyages with more promptitude, and at lower wages. . . and urges the seamen to encounter hazards in the ship’s service, from which they might otherwise be disposed to withdraw.
Barnes v. Andover Comp., L.P., 900 F.2d 630, 632 (3rd Cir. 1990) quoting Harden v. Gordon, 11 F. Cas. 480, 482-83 (1823).

Continue reading " Part III - An Injured Seaman's Entitlement to Maintenance & Cure " »

Posted by Troy & Schwartz | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Injured Seamens' Rights Under Maritime Law

Bookmark:

INJURED SEA AND MARITIME WORKERS:
KNOWING YOUR RIGHTS UNDER MARITIME INJURY LAW - Part II

The Jones Act: When is a Vessel a Vessel and a Seaman a Seaman?

Maritime law is a complex area of the law. An injured seaman or maritime worker should consider seeking out an experienced maritime law attorney before settling any claim with an employer. A maritime law attorney will discuss the seaman’s potential avenues for seeking compensation for his injuries under the Jones Act given the facts of his case. A maritime law attorney will thoroughly evaluate the claimant’s case, and part of this evaluation will be to determine if the claimant will qualify as a seaman under the Jones Act. If the individual qualifies as a seaman and can prove that his sustained injuries stem from his employer’s negligence, or the negligence of his fellow employees, the injured seamen can seek recovery of the following damages:

1. Wages lost from the time of the injury to the time of trial;
2. Loss of future wages;
3. Compensation for medical expenses already incurred and future medical expenses; and
4. Compensation for pain, suffering, and disfigurement.

Under the federal Jones Act , 46 U.S.C. 30101 et. seq., an injured seaman who sustains injuries in the course of his employment due to the negligence of his employers and/or co-workers can seek compensation for his injuries through a maritime personal injury lawsuit. The complaint which initiates the lawsuit may also include a claim that the vessel was unseaworthy. See Part I of this series of blogs which deals with the Doctrine of Unseaworthiness.

The Jones Act is specific for injured seamen, and provides a succinct definition of seaman. The “defining” task has been left up to the courts. Indeed, one of the major issues often arising in a maritime lawsuit brought under the Jones Act is whether the injured complainant will be deemed a seaman and therefore be able to avail himself of the remedies available under the Jones Act.

The analysis of whether or not the plaintiff is a seaman may first involve a determination by the court as to what vessel or vessels exist before determining whether the Plaintiff had a relationship to the vessel. See In re Two-J Ranch, Inc. 534 F. Supp. 2d 671, 677 (W.D. La. 2008).

Continue reading " Injured Sea and Maritime Workers, Part II - Understanding the Jones Act " »

Posted by Troy & Schwartz | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Injured Seamens' Rights Under Maritime Law

Bookmark:

When they think about accidents at sea, many people think of the TV or newspaper stories of passengers on large cruise ships who are injured because of a slip and fall accident or become sick from food poisoning. While it is certainly true that many cruise ship passengers are injured every year during their cruise ship vacations, there is another class of people injured at sea which generally receives little media publicity.

This class consists of the seamen or sea workers who are injured while performing the duties of their job. Sea workers include employees of both luxurious cruise ships and cargo ships. The life of a seaworker may at first blush seem adventurous and glamorous. In reality, a ship, being in motion, and subject to the vagaries of storms and other dangers at sea, is a dangerous working environment. Moreover, a seriously injured seaworker may not be able to obtain immediate medical attention if the ship is hundreds of miles away from a port with suitable medical care facilities.

Seamen who are injured aboard ship generally have three possible sources of compensation for their injuries: The Doctrine of Unseaworthiness of the Vessel, the Jones Act, and the Principle of Maintenance of Cure. For cases where a seaman is killed while in the performance of his duties, the seaman’s family may also seek damages under the Death on the High Seas Act.

This blog posting will discuss the Doctrine of Unseaworthiness and succeeding blogs will cover the Jones Act, the Principle of Maintenance of Cure, and recent case law. It should be emphasized that an injured seaman has an absolute right to maintenance and cure under Maritime law, quite apart from any lawsuit which he or she may bring for personal injury brought under the Jones Act and/or the Doctrine of Unseaworthiness.

Maritime law is a complex area of the law. An injured seaman or maritime worker should consider seeking out an experienced maritime law attorney before settling any claim with his employer. Otherwise the injured worker may never obtain the compensation he may well be entitled to given the facts of his case and the extent of his injuries.

Continue reading " Injured Seamen: Understanding Your Rights Under Maritime Law - Part 1 " »

Posted by Troy & Schwartz | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Injured Seamens' Rights Under Maritime Law

Bookmark:

“Accidents at Sea”. That’s a common way of referring to “Admiralty” or “Maritime” cases. But not all such accidents occur on big cruise ships at sea.

With its large population and thousands of miles of shoreline and inland lakes and rivers, it is not surprising that Florida has more registered water vessels than any other state. Furthermore, water vessel accidents involving personal injuries frequently occur in Florida. In 2007, 376 injuries were reported involving 949 vessels and 14 swimmers. The total fatality count for 2007 was 77 with 6 of the 77 fatalities defined as commercial accidents. Of the fatal water accidents in 2007, 56% of these fatalities were in vessels less than 17 feet in length. See reference #1.

Passengers on a private recreational boat may be able to recover damages as the result of the negligent actions of the boat’s operator. These cases are analogous to situations where a car driver negligently operates the vehicle resulting in injuries to his/her passenger(s).

The following is an example of a situation where a recreational boat owner may be found liable for the injuries caused to his passenger under Florida state law. A boat owner extends an invitation to a friend to take a trip across a lake on the owner’s boat. The water gets choppy, but the boat owner decides to “brave it” and not turn back even though he is much closer to the side of the lake from which the trip originated. The boat is hit by a large wave, causing the friend to be thrown against the side of the boat. The friend suffers numerous lacerations and bruises; fractures her left leg in two places; and subsequently incurs medical expenses in excess of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00).

Now assume that the injured person sues for damages, claiming that the boat operator was negligent as to speed/boat-handling and decision-making. The boat operator blames the “accident” on unexpected bad weather (known as an “Act of God” defense). Will the injured person be able to recover damages?

Continue reading " Florida Personal Injury Law & Recreational Boating Accidents " »

Posted by Troy & Schwartz | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recreational Boating Accidents

Bookmark: