Court Erred Is Dismissing Case Where There Was Jury Question As To Whether 30% Or More Time Was Spent On Vessels By Welder So As To Achieve Seaman Status
THOMAS LOVEJOY VERSUS HARDIE BERGEAUX AND CRAIN BROTHERS,INC.
03-862
COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, THIRD CIRCUIT
03-862 (La.App. 3 Cir, 12/11/03); 862 So. 2d 490; 2003 La. App. LEXIS 3436
December 11, 2003, Rendered
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff employee challenged a decision of the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Calcasieu (Louisiana), which granted defendant employer's motion for summary judgment and found that there were no genuine issues of material fact as to the employee's status as a seaman for purposes of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 688(a).
OVERVIEW: The employer hired the employee to perform welding services on a project involving placing pipeline crossings under an intracoastal waterway. A particular boat transported the employees down the waterway to a crossing site on a daily basis. The employee was injured when someone dropped a bucket on the employee's head. The injury occurred on a levee when the pipelines were being welded together. After the accident, the employee spent a substantial part of his time on the boat, which included piloting it. The employee filed this action, but the trial court ruled in the employer's favor. The court reversed on appeal and remanded for a trial on the merits. The court did not find this to be a case where the undisputed facts revealed that a maritime worker had a clearly inadequate temporal connection to vessels in navigation. The court believed that a reasonable jury could have concluded that the employee spent more than 30 percent of his employment time aboard vessels owned or controlled by the employer. Thus, seaman status under the Act remained a genuine issue of material fact and the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on the issue.
OUTCOME: The court reversed and remanded for a trial.
Bookmark: 
