Employee Who Only Unloaded Fish From Docked Vessels Was Not A Seaman
OSAY DUPLESSIS versus DAYBROOK FISHERIES, INC.
CIVIL ACTION No. 03-1901 SECTION: I/1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3259
March 2, 2004, Decided
March 3, 2004, Filed; March 4, 2004, Entered
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff bailer who unloaded fishing vessels sued defendant employer which operated a fishing business and processing plant, alleging that the employer was liable under the Jones Act and general maritime law for the bailer's injuries from a fall on one of the employer's vessels. The employer moved for summary judgment on the ground that the bailer was not a seaman entitled to protection under maritime law.
OVERVIEW: The bailer contended that maritime law applied to render the employer liable for the bailer's injuries suffered in a fall from a ladder while aboard the employer's vessel. The employer argued that the bailer was not a seaman for maritime purposes since he was a land-based employee who was only aboard vessels when they were docked. The court held that the bailer, whose duties involved only unloading fish from vessels using land-based equipment when the vessels were docked, was not a seaman for purposes of maritime law. The bailer was not involved in fishing operations and did not go to sea, and thus the bailer did not contribute to the primary fishing function of the vessels and had no substantial connection to the vessels in terms of duration and nature.
OUTCOME: The employer's motion for summary judgment was granted.
