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

Tankerman was injured while using a crossover hose on a Grifco barge

Press Release - For immediate release - September 2007

Houston, Texas - A tankerman employed by Grifco Transportation, has brought claims of negligence, unseaworthiness, and for recovery of maintenance and cure against Grifco Transportation, a barge company based in Texas.  The claims are brought under the Jones Act and General Maritime Law.

The injured tankerman claims that he was severely manipulating a cross-over hose on one of Grifco's vessels.  Before being injured on the job, he was an able-bodied seaman with no significant prior injuries.  He is now completely unable to perform his duties as a tankerman and has lost wages, both past and future.  He has received surgery.

The tankerman hired Brian Beckcom and Vuk Vujasinovic at Vujasinovic & Beckcom, P.L.L.C. to handle his Jones Act case.  Mr. Beckcom reports that "most maritime employers are good to their workers and treat safety as the most important part of any job.  However, unfortunately, some employers cut corners on safety and don't treat their workers right after they are injured." 

The case is pending in Neuces County, Corpus Christi, Texas.

About the firm

Vujasinovic & Beckcom, P.L.L.C. is a full service personal injury law firm.  The firm handles cases in Texas and nationwide.  Because of its reputation for success, the firm is often hired by injured offshore workers and their families to handle serious injury and death cases.

You can read more about the law firm by clicking www.vbattorneys.com or by visiting their maritime website, www.maritimeaccidentattorney.com.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

    If you are injured offshore and qualify as a Jones Act seaman (you can read more about the Jones Act and Jones Act seaman status in other entries on this website), some employers will treat you honestly and fairly, provide independent medical advice and care, ensure that you recover from your injuries before requiring you to come back to work, and provide you and your family with appropriate payments while you recover from your injuries. 

    However, sometimes Jones Act employers will try to "trick" you into believing things about your case and your situation that simply aren't true, or are extremely misleading.  Almost every single Jones Act employer will have lawyers and insurance adjusters ready to provide them with advice.  Sometimes, they will attempt to get you to do takes actions that hurt your case and before you have the benefit of independent legal advice. 

    The following are some common tricks used by offshore employers that you should be aware of and that should cause "red flags" to come up:

1.  Injured Jones Act workers ARE NOT required to give a recorded statement. 

     The Jones Act does not require injured seamen to give a recorded statement to the employer or its insurance representatives.  While you should certainly report the accident immediately and in compliance with company procedures, you are simply not required to give a recorded statement.  If your employer or its insurance representatives tell you that you are required to give a recorded statement, you should be very suspicious.  In fact, the employer may try to get you to say things that may hurt your case later on.  And once it's recorded, you will have a lot of trouble later on if you were tricked into saying things you didn't mean. 

    Bottom line:  Be very careful about giving any recorded statement before you get independent legal advice.

2.  Injured Jones Act seamen ARE NOT required to sign any paperwork in exchange for getting medical benefits or maintenance payments. 

    Recently, some Jones Act employers have started requiring, or strongly suggesting, that injured seamen sign papers before they get medical benefits, maintenance, or "advances" on their personal injury settlements.  This is NOT required under the Jones Act.  And it is almost always a big mistake to sign such paperwork before consulting with independent, non-company affiliated lawyers. 

    Why is this a big mistake?  Because Jones Act employers often bury arbitration clauses or other language in this paperwork, and some courts have actually been enforcing these arbitrations clauses or waivers.  What does it mean to sign and be bound by an arbitration clause?  It means you may be forever giving up your right to a trial in Court, and instead, you may be agreeing to have your case heard by an arbitrator in a venue that is hand-picked by your employer.  Almost always a bad idea.

    If your employer requires you to sign paperwork after you're injured, you should STRONGLY consider having the paperwork reviewed by an independent, non-company affiliated lawyer to make absolutely sure you are not giving up important legal rights.

3.  Injured Jones Act seamen ARE NOT required to see company doctors. 

    Contrary to popular opinion, if you are injured offshore, you are not required to see only company-selected doctors.  You should pick a doctor who you like, with whom you are comfortable, and who treats you fairly and appropriately.   Unfortunately, some company-affiliated medical providers will try to force you back to work before you are ready, and will avoid performing tests that reveal the true extent of any possible injury.  Bottom line here is that you are allowed to select your own doctors.  If your Jones Act employer says you are required to go to company-selected doctors only, they are wrong.

4.  Injured Jones Act seamen ARE entitled to medical benefits and maintenance regardless of fault

    If you are injured offshore and qualify as a Jones Act seaman, you are entitled to medical benefits and maintenance (so-called "maintenance and cure") regardless of who was at fault.  Unless you were injured off the job, or you intentionally caused your own injuries, your Jones Act employer must pay maintenance and cure until you reach maximum medical improvement.  If your Jones Act employer tells you the injury was "your fault," or wasn't the fault of the employer, and therefore they are not required to pay your medical benefits and maintenance while you recover, they are wrong on this as well, and you should seek independent legal advice immediately to ensure that you get appropriate medical treatment.

5.  Injured Jones Act seamen ARE entitled to bring claims for negligence and unseaworthiness against their employer if they were injured due to the employer's fault or negligence

    Injured Jones Act seamen are entitled to maintenance and cure regardless of fault.  in addition to no-fault maintenance and cure, injured Jones Act seamen can bring negligence claims and unseaworthiness claims against their employer if the employer's fault caused the injuries, if the vessel or rig was "unseaworthy," or if the employer otherwise caused or even contributed to the injuries. 

    If you can prove negligence or unseaworthiness, you may be entitled to future medical care beyond maximum medical improvement, lost wages both past and future, and pain and suffering and mental anguish damages.  But in these situations, you must prove fault, unlike maintenance and cure, which is no-fault.

    Some Jones Act or maritime employers may tell you that maintenance and cure is all you get.  Don't listen to this nonsense.  If there is negligence or fault, the law says you have a right to bring a negligence or unseaworthiness cause of action under the Jones Act, if you are a seaman.

    Conclusion

    The five issues above are just a few examples of commonly misunderstood legal issues arising in Jones Act injury cases.  There are many more common tactics and misunderstandings that are listed above.  I will continue to update this website with more examples as appropriate, so make sure to check back often for updates on these and other important Jones Act and maritime law topics.

    In the meantime, trust your own common sense.  If you are a Jones Act seaman and are injured offshore, and something just doesn't "smell right," it probably isn't.  If you see red flags or something happens that causes you to be suspicious, you should strongly consider getting a free consultation from an experienced Jones Act attorney.  Most competent Jones Act attorneys will give you a no-charge free consultation and let you know whether your Jones Act employer is trying to trick you or not.  When things don't "seem right," they usually aren't.  Trust your gut.

• 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

The Jones Act was enacted in 1920.  The purpose of the Jones Act was to encourage U.S. maritime commerce, by, among other things, offering appropriate legal protections to injured seamen. 

Seamen are exposed every day to unique dangers and perils.  They must brave the open seas, work on dangerous offshore oil rigs, perform hard dredge work, master complicated maritime procedures and policies, watch out for their fellow workers, dive to great depths off of boats, ships, and rigs, work long hours, work in extreme weather conditions, and be away from their families for long periods of time.

All too often, the wages are not commensurate with the risks.  The sacrifices our maritime workers make every day to ensure that maritime commerce flows smoothly, that oil production in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere takes place, that ships and other vessels can make port, absolutely requires that the law recognize and protect them appropriately.

To take just one example:  When Hurricanes Katrina and Rita ravaged Gulf Coast oil production, and destroyed and disrupted the oil supply, our seamen and offshore workers came to the rescue, turning out in record numbers to get oil production back on line. 

It's not the executives in the fancy suits making millions of dollars a year who deserve our congratulations--although they often take all the credit.  The executives in the tall buildings didn't get the rigs repaired, the derricks fixed, the oil flowing.  No, it was the men and women of the offshore industry, the captains, pilots, roughnecks, deckhands, drillers, divers, toolpushers, ordinary and able bodied seamen, and other offshore laborers who braved the harsh conditions, spent time away from their families, and risked their health and safety to get oil production back on line in record time.  They didn't make millions of dollars a year to do the work--all too often, they were paid inadequately for the risks they took.   And they got no credit for what they did.  But they deserve the credit--their labor got oil production flowing.

Even in this age of so-called tort reform, where insurance companies and multi-billion dollar multi-national companies do everything they can to avoid responsibility to injured workers and their familes, most reasonable and fair-minded lawmakers recognize the amazing contributions made every day by offshore workers, Jones Act seamen, divers, dredge workers, captains, relief captains, tankermen, cooks, pilots, roustabouts, roughnecks, drillers, barge workers, and other offshore workers.

That's why the Jones Act is so important.  It is a formal and legal recognition of the contributions of offshore workers.  It shows that we appreciate their sacrifices, the risks they take every day, and what they contribute to our country's economic security.  It shows that the United States values the workers who make the money just as highly as we value the executives who hire and fire the workers and who never risk their health or safety on an offshore rig, boat, dredge barge, or other offshore vessel.

This entry, while not discussing any breaking legal news or cases, is made in an effort to congratulate the men and women who make the maritime industry work and to encourage all reasonable and fair-minded people, whether involved in the offshore industry or not, to congratulate the men and women who risk their lives to work offshore.

Everyone who has ever gone to sea to work offshore should be congratulated for what you do.   My firm is proud to stand by you in your moment of need, to represent you when necessary, and to call so many of you clients--and friends.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Workers who load and unload the ship's cargo and are employed by stevedoring companies, longshoremen or harbor worker unions, or who are employed by such companies other than the ship's owners are generally considered "longshoremen"  or "harbor workers."

Longshoremen are covered by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA).  They are entitled to a form of federal workers' compensation benefits for on-the-job injuries or death.  Longshoremen are entitled to collect benefits if they were injured in the course of their employment regardless of fault.

Longshoremen are not entitled to bring Jones Act or General Maritime Law claims against their employer.  The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that an injured worker cannot be a Longshoremen and a Jones Act seaman at the same time.  The two laws, and the money compensation they allow, are mutually exclusive.

Although a Longshoremen cannot sue his employer, he may be able to sue the shipowner for negligence.  Shipowners have a duty to ensure that the ship's equipment, tools, work spaces and other areas are safe from dangers.  Shipowners must warn longshoremen/stevedores of any dangerous conditions on their ships.  If the shipowner fails to warn a longshormen/stevedore of a dangerous condition and the longshoremen/stevedore is hurt as a result, the shipowner may be responsible for the longshoreman's damages.  See, for example, Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. De Los Santos (1981) 451 US 156, 68 L.Ed 2d 1, 101S Ct 1614).

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The San Antonio Court of Appeals recently issued a unanimous opinion affirming a $1,585,000.00 jury verdict in a Jones Act case.  The opinion is styled Weeks Marine, Inc. v. Salinas.

Salinas worked for Weeks Marine, a dredging company, as a mate.  He worked on the M/V BTD II, a dredge boat.  While the dredge was in a repair facility in Houma, Louisiana, Salinas injured his back.  He was hurt while lifting two 45 pound batteries.  He was required to carry these batteries from the yard across two gangways.   He was hurt as he stepped from one of the gangways.

The jury found that Salinas was a Jones Act seaman, that Weeks Marine was negligent, that the M/V BTD II was unseaworthy, and issued a verdict of $1,585,000.00, which the trial court reduced to $1,109,500.00.

Weeks Marine appealed.  It claimed that Salinas was not a Jones Act seaman, that the vessel wasn't unseaworthy, and that the evidence of future economic loss was insufficient to support the jury's findings. 

The Court rejected all of Weeks' appellate points, and rightfully so.  Perhaps more importantly, the Court of Appeals also reinstated part of the jury's verdict that the trial court had reduced based on Salinas' contributory negligence.  The Court reasoned that Weeks Marine never requested an additional instruction "inquiring about whether despite the unseaworthy condition, Salinas was contributorily negligence with regard to the injuries he suffered as a result of the unseaworthy condition."  In other words, Weeks Marine waived its contributory negligence defense.

This opinion is a straightforward discussion of seaman status, Jones Act negligence, and unseaworthiness, and re-affirms the legal standards in Jones Act and unseaworthiness claims, as well as the evidence sufficient to support such findings.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks