Archive for the ‘The Jones Act’ Category
July 24th, 2009 | 
Author: On June 25, 2009, in the case of Atlantic Sounding Co. v. Townsend, 129 S.Ct. 2561 (2009), the U.S. Supreme Court said “Yes”. In so holding, the Court resolved a conflict between the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (which held punitive damages were available) and the Second, Third, Fifth and Ninth Circuits which found that they were not.
In Atlantic Sounding, Edgar Townsend was employed as a seaman aboard Atlantic Sounding’s Motor Tug Thomas when he injured his arm after falling on the deck. Atlantic Sounding refused to provide maintenance and cure even though Townsend was injured while in the service of a vessel. Townsend filed suit under the Jones Act and general maritime law alleging negligence, unseaworthiness and arbitrary and willful failure to pay maintenance, among others.
In its reasoning, the Court first acknowledged that punitive damages have long been available at common law for willful, wanton or outrageous conduct, and were first extended to claims under federal maritime law in 1893). See Lake Shore & Michigan Southern R. Co. v. Prentice, 147 U. S. 101, 108, 13 S.Ct. 261, 37 L.Ed. 97 (1893). The Court observed that the maintenance and cure obligation dates back centuries as an aspect of general maritime law, and the failure of a seaman’s employer to provide adequate medical care was the basis for awarding punitive damages in cases decided in the 1800’s. In fact, the Court registered its agreement with such decisions and has found that in addition to wages, “maintenance” includes food and lodging at the ship’s expense, and “cure” refers to medical treatment. Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U. S. 438, 441, 121 S.Ct. 993, 148 L.Ed.2d 931 (2001). The Court noted that an owner’s failure to provide proper medical care for seamen has provided lower courts the impetus to award damages that appear to contain at least some punitive element.
The Court then turned its attention to and rejected arguments by Atlantic Soundings that the decision in Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19, 111 S.Ct. 317, 112 L.Ed.2d 275 (1990), which stated that damages for loss of society may not be recovered on a general maritime law wrongful death claim, was controlling. The Court distinguished Miles since that case did not address maintenance and cure actions in general, or the availability of punitive damages in such actions. Instead, the Court in Miles only considered whether the general maritime law should provide a cause of action for wrongful death based on unseaworthiness.
The Court also acknowledged that Congress has enacted no legislation precluding an award of punitive damages to a seaman whose employer willfully fails to pay maintenance and cure. What’s more, the Court has consistently found that the Jones Act preserves common-law causes of action such as maintenance and cure (The Arizona v. Anelich, 298 U. S. 110, 56 S.Ct. 707, 80 L.Ed. 1075 (1936)) and case law from the Supreme Court supports the view that punitive damages awards continue to remain available in maintenance and cure actions. See, Vaughan v. Atkinson, 369 U. S. 527, 82 S.Ct. 997, 8 L.Ed.2d 88 (1962)
The Court concluded that because punitive damages have long been an accepted remedy under general maritime law, and because neither the holding in Miles, nor the Jones Act altered this understanding, punitive damages for the willful and wanton disregard of the maintenance and cure obligation remain available as a matter of general maritime law.
Posted in 
Tags: 
What is the Jones Act and How does it affect you?
The Jones Act, officially known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, was originally passed in order to provide protective legal rights for American Merchant Marines along with sailors and the ships’ crews. Its author, Senator Wesley Jones of Washington State declared that American sailors were being neglected when it came to medical and financial assistance. The actual act itself is rather multifaceted and attempting to thoroughly grasp its concepts can leave one more than slightly bamboozled. For this reason it is always advantageous to contact an experienced maritime attorney if there are any questions about The Jones Act.
During the late 19th century and early 20th century there was a great deal of concern about the health and well being of merchant marines. If injured at see there was little that could be done to compensate or lend assistance to the wounded seafarer. Recognizing the extreme danger of working at sea and the absence of adequate reparations for injuries The Jones Act established precise benefits for merchant marines and ship crews.
The specifics of The Jones Act can be broken down into two key sections. The first consists of laws that put restrictions on the amount of trade and shipping that can be executed on American owned or flagged ships within the boundaries of the United States. It also limited the amount of foreign materials that were allowed to be used in the building and on board application American ships. Finally, the act enforced that 75% of any ship’s crew had to consist of American citizens. With these new laws in place The United States focused on constructing a solid-built Merchant Marine that would be effective during both peace time as well as war time.
The second portion of The Jones Act which is extremely important extends itself to the furthest corners of the oceans and everywhere in between. This section states any Merchant Marine, sailor or ship member that is injured at sea is fully entitled to medical care and assistance as well as a recovery and restoration to health. Essentially, this stipulates that the employer must pay the member a stipend or compensation to cover medical costs until they have been cured. Additionally, members of the crew have the right to sue if they are hurt on the job due to the negligence of either the ship owner or another crew member or if they are injured due to their presence on a ship that is found not to be sea-worthy which also includes death benefits if a fatality results while on the job.
So how many people does The Jones Act encompass under its coverage? Qualifications for coverage require that an employee spends at least 30% of his or her time in the active service of a Merchant Marine vessel including all staff members.
Under the supervision and guidance of an experienced attorney benefits of The Jones Act can be very rewarding. This is why it is important that a maritime lawyer be consulted before any actions are taken when a situation involving this clause arises.
Beaver County January 9, 2005-
The towboat, Elizabeth M lost power and crashed over the Montgomery Lock & Dam in Beaver County, Pennsylvania on the Ohio River killing four crewmen on board. According to Coast Guard reports, the accidents were due to misconduct and negligence on the part of the Master of the Elizabeth M, as well as negligence on part of the pilot of the Richard C an assistant vessel.
Other Articles
http://kdka.com/local/towboat.report.accident.2.563515.html
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_297356.html