SEAMAN STATUS DENIED WHERE DREDGE WAS NOT VESSEL IN NAVIGATION.
WILLARD STEWART, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. DUTRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Appellee.
Nos. 99-1487, 00-1090
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
230 F.3d 461; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 27090
October 31, 2000, Decided
OVERVIEW: Plaintiff sought to recover for his injuries under, inter alia, the Jones Act, alleging that his injuries occurred while employed as a seaman upon defendant's dredge which was excavating for a tunnel in a harbor. Defendant asserted that the statute did not apply since the dredge was not a vessel in navigation, thus precluding plaintiff's seaman status. The appellate court held that established precedent demonstrated that plaintiff was not a seaman for purposes of the statute since the floating dredge was not a vessel in navigation. The primary purpose of the dredge was not navigation or commerce, and the dredge was not in actual navigation or transit at the time of plaintiff's injuries. Plaintiff failed to show any ground for the court to reexamine, narrow, or distinguish the precedent, and thus the statute was not applicable.
OUTCOME: Order was affirmed; since the primary purpose of defendant's floating dredge was not navigation, and the dredge was not engaged in navigation at the time of plaintiff's injuries while employed on the dredge, established precedent required the finding that plaintiff did not fall within the statutory definition of seaman because the dredge was not a vessel in navigation.
