The Entry Of Summary Judgment In Favor Of Seaman In A Negligence Case Brought Under The Jones Act Was Affirmed Because Even If The District Court Erred In Designating The Litigation As An Admiralty Or Maritime Claim And Striking The Jury Demand, A New Tri
STANLEY KELVIN EUBANKS, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NOBLE OFFSHORE CORPORATION; ET AL., Defendants, NOBLE DRILLING (U.S.) INC., Defendant - Appellant.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 5815
March 13, 2007, Filed
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: In a negligence action brought under the Jones Act, appellant drilling company sought judicial review of the decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans Division, to grant summary judgment in favor of appellant seaman for injuries he sustained while working on a mobile offshore drilling platform.
OVERVIEW: The drilling company argued that the district court abused its discretion by granting, on the eve of trial, the seaman's motion to designate the litigation as an admiralty or maritime claim and to strike the jury demand. Although there was a very strong argument that the district court erred in its ruling, there was no reversible error in the present case. Although it opposed the motion, the drilling company did not request a continuance to cure any possible error. Furthermore, the drilling company had no right to demand a jury trial. Accordingly, a new trial under different procedural timetables and before the same judge would hardly change the outcome. Furthermore, there was no clear error in the district court's factual findings. The district court never reached the issue of whether the mobile offshore drilling platform was unseaworthy. As to the remaining three findings, the appellate court was not left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake had been committed.
OUTCOME: The judgment of the district court was affirmed.
