SEAMAN'S MOTION TO REMAND JONES ACT CASE TO STATE COURT GRANTED...
SEAMAN'S MOTION TO REMAND JONES ACT CASE TO STATE COURT GRANTED AFTER DEFENDANT ERRONEOUSLY REMOVED CASE TO FEDERAL COURT BY CLAIMING THAT SEAMAN'S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WAS SUBJECT TO EXCLUSIVE FEDERAL QUESTION JURISDICTION PURSUANT TO THE CONVENTION ON THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS
WILFREDO JARANILLA VERSUS MEGASEA MARITIME LTD., PANKAR MARITIME S.A., GREECE AND KOUROS MARITIME ENTERPRISES CIVIL ACTION NO. 01-1449 SECTION "J"(2)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
171 F. Supp. 2d 644; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17233; 18 BNA IERCAS 22
October 12, 2001, Decided
October 12, 2001, Filed
October 15, 2001, Entered
DISPOSITION: [**1] Plaintiff's motion to remand was granted.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff seaman was severely burned as a result of an electrical explosion on the ship where he worked. Plaintiff filed suit in state court, seeking damages pursuant to the Jones Act, general maritime law, and applicable foreign law. Defendants removed the action to federal court pursuant to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 9 U.S.C.S. § 201 et seq. The seaman moved to remand.
OVERVIEW: Based on the plain language of the Federal Arbitration Act and the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 9 U.S.C.S. § 201 et seq., the court concluded that United States arbitration law specifically excluded seafarers' contracts of employment from the scope of commercial contracts. 9 U.S.C.S. § 1. The Convention did not apply to employment contracts of seaman, as such contracts were not commercial under the national law of the United States. Accordingly, the court ordered that the case be remanded for lack of federal question subject matter jurisdiction.
OUTCOME: Plaintiff seaman's motion to remand was granted.
