Maritime law, also known as admiralty law, comes from many sources.
The U.S. Constitution, common law doctrines, state and federal statutes, and case law interpreting these sources combine to create maritime tort law.
Trying to navigate this maze and determine your legal remedies after a maritime personal injury is difficult.
For example, different bodies of law apply to:
And that is why I wrote this article.
If you are an injured maritime worker or a bystander or passenger hurt by or on a vessel in state or federal waters, keep reading to learn more about the statutes and common law doctrines that allow for damages awards.
My firm is here to answer any questions about your case or what causes of action apply to your maritime injury. All you have to do is call us at (804) 251-1620 or (757) 810-5614 or complete the online form.
See why other attorneys and past clients have voted me one of Virginia’s best personal injury attorneys. And how I can help you win your case or negotiate a fair tort settlement.
Black’s Law Dictionary 1158 (11th ed. 2019) defines maritime as:
1. Connected with or situated near the sea.
2. Of, relating to, or involving sea navigation or commerce
A personal injury maritime claim, therefore, is an action for damage or injury that is:
1. Caused by a vessel (a ship, boat, jet ski, or other watercraft);
2. On the “navigable waters” of the United States or offshore; and,
3. Resulting from an incident considered traditional maritime activity (the “maritime nexus” test).
In addition, the Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act provides that admiralty and maritime jurisdiction covers personal injury claims caused by a vessel on navigable water, even though you may have suffered the injury on land (such as a dock or the coast).
You may bring a maritime personal injury lawsuit in state or federal court.
State and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction over maritime injury claims.
Here is how:
Article III of the U.S. Constitution creates a Supreme Court and permits Congress to grant federal jurisdiction to any inferior courts established under Article I.
In addition, Article III states that federal judicial power extends to all cases involving admiralty and maritime jurisdiction cases.
Nothing in the Constitution, however, states that the federal judiciary has exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty and maritime law.
In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress saved concurrent state court jurisdiction over common law proceedings so that state courts could supplement and contribute to the administration of federal admiralty and maritime law.
The 20th-century update to the U.S. Code preserved concurrent jurisdiction over admiralty and maritime cases.
28 U.S.C. Section 1333, also known as the Savings to Suitors Clause, states:
The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of (1) Any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction, saving to suitors in all cases all other remedies to which they are otherwise entitled.
Therefore, as the plaintiff in a tort claim under maritime law, you may bring a civil action seeking personal injury damages under the common law in state court, even when alleging that the defendant violated federal law in admiralty.
And state court is often the preferred forum for an injured seaman.
A warning: These jurisdiction rules do not apply to claims brought under one of the workers compensation laws available to injured maritime workers. Either your state’s workers compensation board (in Virginia, the Workers Compensation Commission) or the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Workers Compensation Programs (OWCP) will administer and adjudicate your claim.
Several federal and state statutes and common law remedies potentially apply to maritime injury claims.
A specific law’s applicability to your accident depends on the following:
Below is a summary of the different laws (statutory and common law) that may provide a remedy for your maritime injury.
Enacted in 1920, the Suits in Admiralty Act (SIAA) waives the United States’s sovereign immunity in some situations, allowing you to sue the United States for injuries caused by the negligence of a ship owned or operated by the U.S. government when the negligent act occurs outside the operation of the vessel.
For example, you may bring an action under the SIAA if the U.S. Coast Guard’s negligence during a rescue operation causes harm.
The SIAA is available to maritime workers and ship passengers.
The Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA) is another federal admiralty law.
The DOHSA allows a spouse, child, or dependent family member of a seaman or passenger killed in international waters (more than three miles offshore) to bring a wrongful death action against a ship’s owners or operators.
For example, the DOHSA grants a cause of action for wrongful death against cruise ships and cruise lines.
In addition, the DOHSA gives a cause of action for wrongful death to family members and dependents of persons who die in aviation accidents (airline crashes) occurring more than 12 miles offshore.
The Defense Base Act (DBA) provides workers comp benefits to civilian employees injured when working outside the U.S. on military bases or under a U.S. government contract for national defense or public works.
The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) provides workers compensation benefits to federal employees injured while performing work-related tasks.
For example, FECA benefits may be your only option for work-related injuries incurred as a seaman employed by the U.S. government (or one of its agencies or corporations).
In 1920, the U.S. Congress also enacted the Merchant Marine Act of 1920.
This law, known as the Jones Act because Senator Wesley Jones introduced it, gives legal rights to seamen (the masters or members of a vessel’s crew and many offshore oil and gas workers), allowing them to sue their employers for workplace injuries.
Specifically, the Jones Act states:
A seaman injured in the course of employment or, if the seaman dies from the injury, the personal representative of the seaman may elect to bring a civil action at law, with the right of trial by jury, against the employer. Laws of the United States regulating recovery for personal injury to, or death of, a railway employee apply to an action under this section.
Although it is not a no-fault workers compensation statute, the Jones Act has a relaxed standard for proving causation. Indeed, an employer is liable for damages if its negligence played any part in the injury, no matter how slight.
The Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act (LHWCA) provides wage loss payments, medical benefits, and compensation for permanent partial disability to employees injured in traditional maritime jobs.
For example, the LHWCA covers longshore workers, stevedores, and shipbuilders who are not a master or members of a vessel’s crew.
The LHWCA provides the only legal remedy for many injured shipyard workers unless a third party’s negligence caused the accident.
The Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities Act of 1952 is a federal statute extending the benefits of the LHWCA to civilians injured when working for one of the U.S. Military’s non-appropriated fund instrumentalities.
Non-appropriated fund instrumentalities include departments acting for the comfort, pleasure, and morale of the Armed Forces, such as the following:
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act is a federal statute extending the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act to employees injured working on the Outer Continental Shelf in exploring and developing natural resources.
Federal law defines the Outer Continental Shelf as:
all submerged lands lying seaward and outside of the area of lands beneath navigable waters as defined in section 1301 of this title, and of which the subsoil and seabed appertain to the United States and are subject to its jurisdiction and control.
The Public Vessels Act (PVA) is similar to the Suits in Admiralty Act in that it waives the federal government’s sovereign immunity in some situations.
Specifically, you may bring an action under the Public Vessels Act if the negligent operation of a vessel owned or operated by the U.S. government causes injury.
The PVA provides a cause of action to maritime workers, passengers, and anyone injured by the government vessel’s negligence.
Each state has workers compensation laws providing specific benefits to workers injured from the risk of employment or who develop an occupational disease.
For example, in Virginia, the state workers compensation law covers more than 95 percent of all employees.
State workers comp covers some employees of maritime and shipbuilding businesses.
In addition to the federal and state statutes discussed above, several other doctrines potentially apply to maritime personal injury claims, such as the following:
Admiralty and maritime law recognize that a shipowner must pay maintenance and cure to a seaman who becomes sick or injured in the ship’s service (or while subject to recall).
Maintenance refers to payment for a seaman’s daily expenses, including food and lodging.
A shipowner is liable to a seaman for food and lodging when the seaman becomes sick or injured in the ship’s service.
Usually maintenance awards are calculated using a per-diem, which may be specified by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) if you belong to a labor union or based on actual expenditures.
Maintenance ends when you reach maximum medical improvement (MMI) for your injury or medical impairment.
Cure refers to payment for medical treatment to the point you reach MMI.
Unlike workers compensation in Virginia, the cure doctrine does not cover palliative care such as pain management that can relieve your symptoms after the orthopedic injuries (back, neck, knee, shoulder, etc.) or concussion heal.
Federal courts have long recognized general maritime negligence claims.
Indeed, it is a settled principle in maritime cases of physical injury to persons that the owner of a ship in navigable waters owes to all who are on board for purposes not inimical to his legitimate interests the duty of exercising reasonable care under the circumstances of each case.
The situations giving rise to a maritime negligence claim are innumerable.
But generally, you must prove the following:
In addition, in the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer must warn the product’s users when (i) its product requires the incorporation of a part, (ii) the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that the integrated product is likely to be dangerous for its intended uses, and (ii) the manufacturer has no reason to believe that the product’s users will realize that danger.
A shipowner must pay the wages an injured or ill seaman would have earned if he had completed the contractual terms of the employment, at least until the voyage’s end.
Unseaworthiness is a general maritime cause of action.
Under this doctrine, an owner is liable to indemnify (pay) a seaman for an injury caused by the vessel’s unseaworthiness (including problems with appliances and equipment). This liability extends to injuries occurring onboard a moored (docked) ship.
Fault does not serve as the basis for an unseaworthiness claim. Instead, it is a strict liability cause of action.
Examples of items serving as the basis for an unseaworthiness claim include:
No.
Contributory negligence is not a defense to a personal injury claim under maritime law.
However, your contributory negligence can be considered in the mitigation of damages.
It depends.
Rule 9 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a plaintiff to designate the action as an admiralty or maritime claim.
Generally, admiralty claims are tried without a jury, while juries hear common law claims.
Confusion and disputes arise when a plaintiff pleads multiple causes of action, some arising under admiralty law and others arising under common law principles of negligence. Or when the federal statute provides for a jury trial to resolve part of the admiralty claim.
Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has provided clarity.
For example, suppose an injured seaman brings a personal injury case under the Jones Act and the theories of unseaworthiness and maintenance and cure.
The Jones Act declares that a jury should try the negligence part of the claim.
Therefore, a jury will also determine the maintenance, cure, and unseaworthiness claims so long as the complaint does not designate the case as an admiralty claim under Rule 9.
Depending on the causes of action brought, several statutes of limitations may apply to your maritime personal injury claim, including the following:
Sometimes.
Punitive damages are not available under Jones Act claims.
You may, however, recover punitive damages under general maritime law for claims of unseaworthiness or failure to pay maintenance and cure.
But to recover punitive damages and attorney’s fees, you must show that the ship owner lacked a reasonable defense and exhibited callousness and indifference to your plight.
Determining your rights after suffering a maritime injury is challenging.
Then you must prove your claims.
Leave your case’s legal research, pretrial discovery, and prosecution to us so you can focus on your recovery.
If you are an injured maritime worker or someone who suffered injuries on the sea or other navigable waters, we can help.
We represent persons with maritime injury claims in Virginia and Maryland.