Maritime Injury Lawyer & Attorney : Vujasinovic & Beckcom : Jones Act : Serving Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi

In addition to publishing The Maritime Lawyer, our firm recently completed our new firm website.  You can find it at www.vbattorneys.com. 

Our aim is provide as much useful information as we can about our firm, legal news, and other pressing issues in the law.  We've got a lot of information about cases, Jones Act and Maritime law, injury claims, accident claims, dealing with insurance companies, etc.

Please take a moment to visit the site.  We welcome any suggestions, questions, or advice on how to make the website better.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to the National Legal News, the recent drowings on Lake Travis near Austin, Texas and the ferry accident last year that killed 20 people have "prompted Texas state and local offices to seek better regulation of commercially operated vessels."  Click here to read the full article.

Although the Jones Act covers Jones Act seamen injured on vessels, there is no federal counterpart for passengers on commercial vessels outside general maritime law and Coast Guard regulations, which have proved inadequate to prevent recent disasters on commercial vessels.

The federal government has a uniform set of laws that govern commercial trucking companies.  It makes perfect sense to consider such rules for commercial vessels and boats as well, particularly given the potentially catastrophic consequences of unqualified captains or poorly maintained or manned commercial vessels. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A Jones Act claim will always be governed by federal substantive law.  Most, if not all, general maritime claims will also be governed by federal substantive law.

However, an injured Jones Act seaman or maritime worker may be able to file his claim in state court.  When you first speak with your lawyer, you should ask him to tell you whether you should file your claim in a federal or state court, and why.  A good Jones Act lawyer or maritime lawyer should be able to tell you immediately where you should file your claim and tell you why as well.  If the lawyer can't tell you immediately, considering going elsewhere for legal help.

What are some of the considerations when deciding where to file your Jones Act injury claim or maritime injury claim?  Since federal law will apply, where you file the case will depend on procedural issues and pragmatic onces as well.

From a procedural standpoint, you may be able to get more pre-suit discovery in state court.  Many federal courts limit the amount of pre-suit discovery you can conduct severely.  Discovery is a good way to get at the truth of what caused the maritime injury, so consider state court if the discovery rules are more expansive.

A pragmatic consideration is whether the state court options provide a more people-friendly venue that federal court.  In Texas, for example, an injured Jones Act seaman can file his injury claims where he resided at the time of the claim.  In other words, the injured Jones Act seaman can file close to home, presumably where his family lives and where his doctors are located. 

Also, voir dire in federal court is generally more limited.  For some reason, federal judges like to conduct their own voir dire and limit voir dire from the lawyers ("voir dire" is the process of selecting a jury).  If you want more input into the jury selection process, you should almost always file a Jones Act injury claim or a maritime injury claim in state court.

There are many other considerations when deciding where to bring a Jones Act injury claim or a maritime injury claim.  A good lawyer will be able to walk you through these decisions and explain why you should file in a particular venue.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

All doctors don't perform open-heart surgery.  And all lawyers don't handle maritime cases.  If you have a maritime injury or Jones Act case, and you're looking for legal representation, you need to know the difference between a "maritime lawyer" or "Jones Act" lawyer and other lawyers.

A maritime lawyer, or a Jones Act lawyer, as the names suggest, is someone who practices "maritime law."  Maritime law governs cases that occur in the waterways of the United States, the Gulf of Mexico, or at sea. 

Maritime law is NOT like land-based law.  It is highly specialized.  It is based on case law, statutes, and interpretations of cases and statutes that may literally be hundreds of years old.  In the United States, for instance, maritime law has developed literally since the founding of the Republic.  And U.S. maritime law is based on and relies on cases, statutes, and traditions that pre-date the United States itself. 

You should be very careful when selecting a lawyer to handle a Jones Act case or maritime law case.  There are pitfalls and traps that canny defense lawyers and companies can use to limit or even eliminate recovery for damages. 

When interviewing a lawyer for a Jones Act or maritime law injury claim, think about asking these questions:

1.  How many Jones Act or maritime law cases have you handled?
2.  Are you board-certified in any area of law?
3.  Have you written any articles on the Jones Act or maritime law?
4.  Do you have the experience and resources to take on the maritime employer and its insurance company?
5.  What is your track record in maritime and Jones Act cases?
6.  Are you going to try to settle the case quickly and cheaply or is your goal to obtain the maximum fair compensation?
7.  Do you have any former or current clients that would be willing to vouch for your abilities?

This is just a partial list of questions.  The bottom line is that you wouldn't trust your heart with a doctor who didn't treat heart conditions.  You shouldn't trust your Jones Act or maritime case with a lawyer that doesn't regularly handle such cases.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a recent maritime decision, the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently permitted a shipowner to sue a employee.

The employer had sued the worker for causing damage to the shipowner's property.  The Court held that nothing in the FELA, the Jones Act, or maritime law prohibited a  shipowner from suing an employee for negligence.

The case is  Withhard v. Otto Candies, L.L.C., 431 F.3d 840 (5th Cir. 2005).

You really have to wonder about a shipowner that would sue its own employee except under extremely egregious circumstances.  In any event, maritime workers, seamen, and other offshore workers should be aware of this possibility.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has upheld a $19,000,000 verdict in a maritime injury case.

The case, styled In re Superior Construction Co., Inc. v. Charles Brock et al, involved injuries to recreational boaters.

Superior Construction Company was the general contractor for the Florida Department of Transportation’s work expanding the Blanding Boulevard Bridge over the Cedar River in Jacksonville, Florida.  The company frequently stationed the barge and the tug so that recreational boaters could  pass under the bridge.  On December 29, 2001, the company tied the barge and the tug so that they blocked a large portion of the waterway commonly used by recreational boaters to pass under the bridge. In addition, employees positioned the tug perpendicular to the barge, further hindering passage.

The barge was painted black which made it difficult to see at night.  The barge and tug had a total of twelve lights and on the night of the collision only three of ten lights on the barge, and only one of two lights on the tug, were operating.

Charles Brock was driving a recreational boat and approached the bridge at night.  Brock slowed the boat and turned to pass through one of the three spans used by recreational boaters. Neither he nor anyone on his boat saw barge until it was too late to avoid a crash.  As a result of the allision, he and his passengers suffered extensive injuries.

Superior brought an admiralty action in federal district court seeking to limit its liability for the allision under the Limitation of Liability Act.2 Brock and his passengers counterclaimed. The district court found that Superior was not entitled to limit its liability and that Superior was responsible for the injuries. Superior appealed.  On appeal, Superior claimed that the barge had not obstructed traffic and that the company had overcome the presumption that they were at fault.   Superior also claimed that the court should have assigned a percentage of fault to Brock, since his blood alcohol level exceeded the legal limit under federal and state law.

The appellate court reviewed the district court’s application of two rules that apply when a moving vessel allides with a stationary vessel. The first rule, called the Oregon Rule, says that the burden of proof is initially on the moving vessel to prove that the allision was the stationary vessel’s fault and that the moving vessel acted with reasonable care or that the accident was unavoidable.  The Pennsylvania Rule, by contrast, shifts the burden to the stationary vessel if it violates a statutory rule intended to prevent collisions.  The stationary vessel must then prove that its statutory violation could not have been a cause of the accident.   In cases where both vessels involved in the allision are operating in violation of statutes designed to prevent accidents, the Pennsylvania Rule requires the court to find that both parties contributed to the accident, unless it finds that either party could not have been at fault.

The court found that Superior had violated a federal statute stating that it is unlawful to tie up or anchor vessels in a way that would obstruct other vessels from passing through a channel. 

The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s opinion that the only cause of the accident could have been Superior’s actions in placing and lighting the barge.  The Court also explained that the company failued to warn the Coast Guard or recreational boaters.

Superior appealed the amount of damages awarded to two of the passengers, claiming they were too high.  The Court disagreed.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

If you are someone you know is injured offshore or near a navigable body of water, there may be a legal claim for damages under the Jones Act, General Maritime Law, the Longshore & Harbor Worker's Compensation Act (LWCHA), or other state or federal laws.  However, the procedural and substantive law governing maritime legal claims is very different from the law governing onshore injuries.

You need to be sure you don't run aground during your legal voyage.  Here are five helpful tips for workers with offshore injury claims.

1.  If you are considering hiring a lawyer, the very first thing you should do is ensure your lawyer has experience handling maritime injury or Jones Act claims.  Simply put, most lawyers don't handle these claims on a regular basis.  If you were having heart problems, you wouldn't seek help from a knee doctor, would you?  Of course not.  You'd find a heart doctor.  The same is true of lawyers.  If you have a maritime claim, you should talk to a maritime lawyer, not a tax lawyer or estate lawyer or other lawyer who doesn't regularly handle maritime injury claims.

2.  You need to know that the law governing maritime injury and Jones Act cases is entirely different than land-based claims.  The location of the worksite and the nature of the work being performed may have a substantial impact on the types of claims you can bring.  An experienced maritime lawyer should be able to tell you what laws govern your case.   Don't rely on your brother's uncle 's cousin who got in a truck wreck to tell you what your case is worth.  Jones Act and maritime injury claims are simply different than other types of claims.

3.  If you are injured offshore, DO NOT assume that you'll be covered by worker's compensation insurance.  In fact, many offshore injuries are NOT covered by worker's compensation insurance.  Even though you may not get worker's compensation coverage, however, if you're a Jones Act seaman, or a Longshoreman, you may get medical bills paid and wage replacement under the Jones Act or the Longshore & Harbor Worker's Compensation Act.  Although different legal rules govern these claims, they are similar to worker's compensation statutes in some respects. 

4.  If you're injured offshore and are covered under the Jones Act, you will likely get more legal remedies than other injured workers.  For instance, you have a claim for maintenance and cure (see the post on maintenance and cure on this website), Jones Act "negligence," and unseaworthiness (see related posts below).  You may also have third-party negligence clams under General Maritime Law if someone other than your employer was at fault. 

5.  Although you should report your injury as soon as possible, it's generally NOT a good idea to give written or recorded statements to company agents or officials until you've obtained legal help.  The reason is because the company's agents or insurance representatives may try to trick you into saying something that hurts your case.  It is much easier to avoid this problem upfront than try to explain it later on during your legal proceedings.  The companies all have experienced lawyers advising them on their rights--you should too.

For more information about the Jones Act and maritime law, see the related posts in this website, below.  Or call 877-724-7800 for a free initial consultation.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As the gambling industry continues to expand, so does the use of gambling boats.  If a worker is assigned to a gambling boat and is injured in the course of his or her employment, they are typically treated as Jones Act seamen regardless of their duties on the particular vessel.

This is true on gambling or casino boats that occasionally cruise away from the shore.  It may not be true if the gambling boat is permanently affixed shoreside. 

Many states allow gambling boats to work while permanently moored, with no intention of taking them out onto the water.  Under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Stewart v. Dutra, the status of workers on permanetly moored gambling boats is unclear.

Two courts have reached apparently opposite conclusions regarding the status of workers on permanently moored gambling boats for Jones Act purposes.  Those cases are Earls v. Belterra Resort, 439 F.Supp.2d 884 (S.D.Ind. 2006) (holding such workers are not Jones Act seaman because the permanently moored boat was not a "vessel") and Booten v. Argosy Gaming Co., 848 N.E. 2d 141 (Ill. App. 4/18/2006). 

The bottom line in gambling boat cases is that, like much of Jones Act and maritime law, the question can only be answered by a careful analysis of the facts and circumstances of each case.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

We are lawyers who represent injured Jones Act seamen, injured maritime workers, and their families.  We provide the full range of legal services and all lawyers in the firm are Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.  We represent clients in Houston, the Gulf Coast, across Texas, the southwest, across the United States and around the world. 

To learn more about our lawyers, our people, and our track record, visit our main website at www.vbattorneys.com. 

We have or are currently representing clients in the following types of Jones Act and maritime injury cases:

• All Jones Act claims
• Offshore Oil Rig Accidents
• Longshoremen
• Dredge Workers
• Stationary Production Rig Workers
• Tug Boat Workers
• Cruise Ship Workers and Passengers
• Shrimp Boat Workers
• Fishermen
• Trawlers
• Tankers
• Crew Boats
• Ferriers
• Water Taxis
• Spar Platforms
• Jack-up rig workers
• General Maritime Workers
• Casino Boat Workers
• Container Boat Workers
• Pilots
• Barge workers
• Galleyhands
• Offshore Caterers
• Captains
• Relief Captains
• Tankermen

We represent individuals and their family members.  We do not represent or defend maritime employers, insurance carriers, or Jones Act employers.

All cases are handled on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless we win your case.

More About the Jones Act, General Maritime Law, the Longshore & Harbor Worker's Compensation Act, and Admiralty Law

People are confused by the laws that govern offshore injury claims.  Even most lawyers aren't experienced in these types of claims.  For example, offshore oil rig workers are often surprised to learn that they may be covered under the Jones Act.  Dredge workers are also surprised to find that they may have Jones Act claims.  Casino workers, dive boat workers and divers, fishermen, and offshore oil field workers often don't know that they have certain legal remedies available if and when they are injured.  And offshore workers generally are surprised to learn that many times, they are not lmited to worker's compensation benefits--they may have much better legal options under the Jones Act, General Maritime Law, Admiralty Law, or the LHWCA.

From the very beginning, our firm was founded with maritime workers in mind.  We know that Jones Act workers, maritime workers, and others in the offshore industry work in sometimes work dangerous conditions.  The law governing these claims may entitle offshore workers to significantly higher settlements than land-based worker's compensation claimants.  

If you work on any sort of floating vessel or platform, you are likely covered under the Jones Act or general maritime law.  Don't simply assume that worker's compensation is all you get until you've talked with an experienced offshore attorney.  Don't let your employer  trick you.  Don't let the insurance company fool you.  Don't let a company affiliated doctor give you legal advice.  Call Vujasinovic & Beckcom and let us tell you, free of charge, whether you have a claim other than worker's compensation.  Let us explain your rights.  Let us help you in your time of need.  Arm yourself with information.  Then and only then can you can make an informed decision about what to do.

Jones Act settlements can be substantial.  But the law is complicated.  You can probably get a small settlement on your own.  But if you want the best medical treatment and a fair settlement that will provide appropriate financial security for you and your family, talk to one of our attorneys.  We will speak to you free of charge.  Our toll free number is 877.724.7800.  You can also visit our main website at www.vbattorneys.com to learn more about our firm and our results.

Don't select the first lawyer you know.  Just like doctors don't all perform heart surgery or brain surgery, all lawyers do not handle Jones Act cases, general maritime law cases, or offshore injury cases.  Some lawyers with Jones Act experience may in fact be connected to or affilated with shipowners or offshore employers.  Our firm has never represented offshore companies.  We represent only offshore workers.

We will give you a free consultation and let you know whether you have a claim, what type of claim you have, and what you should do to ensure you have a shot at a fair settlement. 

Maybe best of all, if you hire our firm to help you with your claim, one of the firm's founding partners (not a legal assistant or junior lawyer) will take the lead on your case from start to finish and will be available to you whenever you need advice or assistance with your claim. 

Your physical and financial health is too important to trust with an insurance company or an inexperienced lawyer.  Your employer and the insurance companies get the best lawyers they can find.  You should too.  You and your family deserve the best legal representation possible--nothing less.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks