FEDERAL BOAT SAFETY ACT PREEMPTS COMMON LAW CLAIMS FOR FAILURE TO INSTALL PROPELLER GUARDS

REX R. SPRIETSMA. Adm'r of the estate of Jeanne Sprietsma,Deceased, Appellant, v. MERCURY MARINE, a Division of Brunswick Corporation,Appellee.

Docket No. 89492-Agenda 17-March 2001.
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
2001 Ill. LEXIS 1039
August 16, 2001, Filed

DISPOSITION: Affirmed.

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant survivor filed a wrongful-death action against appellee manufacturer, among others. The circuit court of Cook County (Illinois) granted the manufacturer's motion to dismiss, finding the claims to be impliedly preempted. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the common law claims for failure to install propeller guards were expressly preempted. The supreme court granted the survivor's petition for leave to appeal.

OVERVIEW: The issue was whether the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 (FBSA), 46 U.S.C.S. ß 4301 et seq. (1994), preempted state common law causes of action based on the manufacturer's failure to install propeller guards on its boat engines. The survivor's decedent fell from a motor boat and was struck by the motor's propeller blades. Although the survivor's claims bore upon state and federal concerns, the supreme court ruled that federal concerns predominated. Therefore, the supreme court did not apply a presumption against preemption. The supreme court addressed whether the FBSA expressly preempted the survivor's common law tort claims. The inclusion of a savings clause prohibited a broad reading of the express preemption provision, so there was no express preemption. However, the supreme court found that implied preemption was warranted in order to continue the line of uniformity laid down by the federal courts that found preemption under the FBSA. Several federal district courts and courts of appeal found preemption, express or implied, in similar propeller guard cases.

OUTCOME: Judgement was affirmed.

Bookmark and Share