SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED AGAINST JONES ACT SEAMAN WHERE SEAMAN DID NOT ESTABLISH MOVING HEAVY GARBAGE IS A TWO PERSON JOB AND CREW INCOMPETENCE
SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED AGAINST JONES ACT SEAMAN WHERE SEAMAN DID NOT ESTABLISH MOVING HEAVY GARBAGE IS A TWO PERSON JOB AND CREW INCOMPETENCE - COURT FINDS SHIPOWNERS FAILURE TO TRAIN ON HOW TO LIFT WAS INSIGNIFICANT AND THAT INCURRING A STRAINING INJURY WHILE PERFORMING A TASK DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE TASK REQUIRES ADDITIONAL CREW
TWALLA JOY HAYNES, Plaintiff, v. HARRAH'S CASINO JOLIET, Defendant.
Case Number: 99 C 5546
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION
2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18847
November 15, 2001, Decided
November 16, 2001, Docketed
DISPOSITION: [*1] Defendant's motion for summary judgment [11-1] granted.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff employee sued defendant employer for damages for a back injury she allegedly sustained while working on the employer's gaming vessel. The employee's remaining claims were that the employer was liable for damages under the Jones Act of 1920 for negligence and under general maritime law for unseaworthiness. The employer moved for summary judgment on the employee's claims.
OVERVIEW: The employee, who worked as a cleaner, allegedly injured her back while setting a wheeled garbage container down inside a ship's elevator. The same allegations underlay both of the employee's claims: (1) the vessel was understaffed; (2) the crew was incompetent; (3) the employer failed to supply the employee with proper equipment to move heavy garbage; and (4) the employer failed to properly train the employee on how to lift or move heavy garbage. The court found that the employee, as a matter of law, did not establish either claim. Regarding understaffing, the employee produced no evidence to show it was unreasonable for the employer to expect the employee to move the container herself; the evidence showed it was a one-person job. Her injury by itself did not establish that it was a two-person job. One instance of a co-worker leaving the container in a hallway did not establish crew incompetence. Nothing indicated that the container was inadequate. The employee had comprehensive training on her job duties, and failure to train on how to lift was insignificant, as the employee did not try to lift the container on the day she was injured.
OUTCOME: The court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment.
