In a Jones Act seaman's suit to recover damages for injuries sustained while working as a deckhand for defendants, seaman's motion to sever his cure claim for an expedited trial was granted; seaman had not reached maximum medical improvement...
ROLDIN DINET VERSUS RENE J. CHERAMIE & SONS, INC., A.R. CHERAMIE MARINE MANAGEMENT, INC., and MARTIN GAS MARINE LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90202
December 5, 2007, Decided
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff, a Jones Act Seaman, filed a motion to sever for expedited trial to determine his right to cure benefits. The seaman had filed suit against defendants, a vessel owner and an employer, seeking to recover damages in connection with the seaman’s slip and fall accident while working as a deckhand.
OVERVIEW: The seaman alleged that his physician was recommending that the seaman undergo lumbar steroid injections and a cervical fusion but that defendants had not paid for any cure benefits. The seaman alleged that he was in dire need of medical treatment and could not wait until the bench trial on his claims, some seven months hence, to obtain the recommended medical treatment. Defendants opposed the motion to sever, asserting that the two trials would be duplicative, and further, defendants had agreed to pay for the injections to see if such treatment would improve the seaman’s condition so that he could avoid the fusion surgery. In granting the motion to sever, the court held that the seaman had a compelling interest in an expedited trial to determine his entitlement to cure benefits because he had not reached maximum medical improvement. Further, the seaman had not requested a jury trial, and thus, defendants' concerns about duplicative trials were unavailing. Finally, defendants' objections to severance were generalized in nature and would apply to any situation in which there was a severance.
OUTCOME: The court granted the seaman’s motion to sever. The trial on the right to cure benefits would take place several months prior to the bench trial on the remainder of the seaman’s claims. The court also granted the seaman leave to have new counsel enroll.



