Court Dismisses Seaman's Complaint For Wrongful Discharge But Recognizes A Public Policy Exception To The At-Will Nature Of Maritime Employment

WALTER C. KRETZER, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. HESS OIL VIRGINISLANDS CORP., Defendant/Appellee.

Civ. App. No. 2001-0019
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, DIVISION OF ST. CROIX, APPELLATE DIVISION
2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15576
April 12, 2002, Considered
August 16, 2002, Decided
August 16, 2002, Filed

PRIOR HISTORY: On Appeal from the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands. Re: Terr. Ct. Civ. No. 913/1991.

DISPOSITION: Decision of Territorial Court affirmed.

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant seaman appealed the order of the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands the Territorial Court which entered judgment on the pleadings in favor of appellee, the seaman's former employer, and found that federal maritime law preempted the seaman, as a seaman operating in territorial waters, from bringing any claim under the Virgin Islands Wrongful Discharge Act (VIWDA), 24 V.I. Code Ann. § 76.

OVERVIEW: The employer specifically stated that the seaman refused to pilot small ships under the observation of an experienced pilot. The seaman alleged that the employer lacked just cause for terminating him and attempted, but was unable, to meet with the employer to discuss the reasons for his termination. The court agreed with the trial court that maritime law governed the case. The trial judge applied its preemptive effect too broadly in effectively ruling that the seaman, as an at-will employee under federal maritime law, could never bring a claim for wrongful discharge under the VIWDA. Substantive maritime law recognized a public policy exception to the at-will maritime employment, whether such a public policy exception was grounded in the VIWDA or elsewhere. The court also agreed with the trial court, however, that the complaint as it was pleaded did not state a claim for a maritime tort for wrongful discharge and was therefore properly dismissed. Accordingly, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment, which dismissed the seaman's complaint on the pleadings.

OUTCOME: The court affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Comments

That seaman was my father. He was without doubt one of the most sought out pilots in the northeast in his day. A life that ended well before his time.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)