CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pena v. Keystone Shipping Co.

Plaintiff Martin Pena, a worker aboard the S.S. DENALI but employed by Coastal Hydro Services, Inc., sued Keystone Shipping Co., the vessel owner, for personal injuries due to alleged negligence and unseaworthiness. Keystone filed a motion for summary judgment. The Court ruled that the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act (LHWCA) applied, which abolished the unseaworthiness claim against the vessel owner. Consequently, the Court granted summary judgment on the unseaworthiness claim, dismissing it with prejudice. However, the Court denied summary judgment on the LHWCA negligence claim, finding that while the evidence was tenuous, there was just enough to potentially establish a breach of Keystone's turnover duty related to insufficient lighting.

Maritime LawPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentNegligenceUnseaworthinessLHWCALongshore and Harbor Workers Compensation ActShipowner LiabilityVessel OwnerDuty of Care
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Seemann v. Coastal Environmental Group, Inc.

Plaintiff Johnny Seemann filed an action against Coastal Environmental Group, Inc., alleging injuries from an unseaworthy barge and negligence under the Jones Act and general maritime law. Seemann sought to amend his complaint to add GSI Disaster Services, Inc., as a defendant. District Judge Spatt, presiding over the case in the Eastern District of New York, granted in part and denied in part this motion. The Court denied adding Jones Act negligence and maintenance and cure claims against GSI, finding GSI was not Seemann's employer. However, the motion to add an unseaworthiness claim against GSI was granted, as the presence of ice on the vessel's deck plausibly suggested an unseaworthy condition, a claim for which strict liability applies to the vessel owner.

Jones ActMaritime LawUnseaworthinessNegligenceMotion to AmendFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 15Rule 12(b)(6)Seaman InjuryBarge AccidentEmployer Liability
References
60
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2010

Scoran v. Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc.

Plaintiff Jason N. Scoran, a Second Mate on the vessel Overseas New Orleans, suffered a compound leg fracture after falling into an unprotected swash hole in a fuel tank during cleaning operations in 2006. He filed a Jones Act claim alleging negligence and unseaworthiness, also seeking maintenance and cure. Plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment, seeking to dismiss defendants' comparative and third-party negligence defenses, and a finding that the vessel was unseaworthy as a matter of law due to the unguarded hole and alleged violations of work-hour regulations. The court denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment in all respects, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding the comparative negligence defense and the unseaworthiness claim, and declining to apply the Pennsylvania Rule for causation.

Jones ActMaritime LawSeaworthinessComparative NegligenceSummary JudgmentShipboard AccidentFuel TankGuard RailsWorking HoursVessel Safety
References
43
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tillman v. Lykes Bros. Steamship

This case concerns unseaworthiness and negligence claims brought by the survivors and estate of deceased longshoreman Alex Tillman against Lykes Bros. Steamship Co., Inc. for asbestos exposure. The plaintiffs, Ethylene Tillman (widow and estate representative) and Alex Tillman's three children, sought damages for unseaworthiness, a survival action, and wrongful death. The court granted summary judgment to Lykes on all claims. It found the unseaworthiness claim barred by 1972 LHWCA amendments because Tillman's asbestosis manifested after 1972. The survival action was precluded by res judicata due to a prior judgment against Alex Tillman. Additionally, claims for mental anguish, grief, and bereavement were deemed non-compensable under maritime law. Finally, the remaining wrongful death claims for loss of society and consortium were barred by collateral estoppel, applying the Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 46(1).

AsbestosisLongshoreman and Harbor Worker's Compensation Act (LHWCA)UnseaworthinessNegligenceRes JudicataCollateral EstoppelWrongful DeathSurvival ActionMaritime LawOccupational Disease
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 24, 1989

Marroquin v. American Trading Transportation Co.

Plaintiff Edmundo S. Marroquin was injured on November 8, 1985, while cleaning a cargo tank aboard the S.S. Washington Trader on the high seas. Marroquin was employed by third-party defendant Stevens Technical Services and the vessel was owned by defendant and third-party plaintiff American Trading Transportation Company. Marroquin initially sued American Trading for negligence and later added a cause of action for unseaworthiness. American Trading then instituted a third-party action for contribution and indemnification against Stevens. Stevens moved for summary judgment, arguing that Marroquin's unseaworthiness claim was barred by the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA), which would also dismiss American Trading's third-party action. The court denied Stevens' motion, finding that Marroquin was not covered by the LHWCA because he was the equivalent of a 'member of a crew' working on the high seas, not a land-based worker in port. Additionally, the LHWCA's geographical scope does not extend to injuries on the high seas during a long international voyage. Therefore, Marroquin could maintain his unseaworthiness claim, and American Trading could seek contribution or indemnification from Stevens.

Maritime LawUnseaworthiness ClaimLHWCA InapplicabilityHigh Seas InjurySeaman StatusThird-Party ActionSummary Judgment MotionVessel Cleaning CrewContribution and Indemnification
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brown & Root, Inc. v. DeSautell

Warner L. DeSautell, a diver working for Taylor Diving from Brown & Root's barge "Hugh W. Gordon", suffered a back injury when he slipped and fell in a submerged diving bell. The trial court found Brown & Root liable for unseaworthiness and Taylor Diving for Jones Act negligence. Appellants challenged the findings on seaworthiness, negligence, and the computation of damages, including wage growth and discount rates. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence for unseaworthiness and negligence, and upholding the damage computations and denying a motion to dismiss related to appeal bonds.

Jones ActMaritime LawDiving AccidentUnseaworthinessEmployer NegligenceDiving BellPersonal InjuryDamages CalculationWage Growth RateDiscount Rate
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Haynes v. Rederi A/S Aladdin

In this admiralty case, a gang foreman, referred to as the libelant, sought damages for injuries sustained from a fall on the vessel ss ASKVIN in January 1957, alleging unseaworthiness and negligence. The respondents denied liability and claimed contributory negligence. Texas Employers Insurance Association intervened to recover compensation and medical expenses paid. The court found the vessel unseaworthy and the respondents negligent. However, it also determined that the libelant was 50% contributorily negligent. Damages for lost wages and pain and suffering were awarded to the libelant, which were then reduced by half, and the intervenor was reimbursed for its payments. A subsequent motion to retax costs addressed attorney's fees.

LongshoremanMaritime LawUnseaworthinessNegligenceContributory NegligencePersonal InjuryDamagesWorkers' CompensationAdmiraltyFederal Employers' Liability Act
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2001

Harrison v. SEA RIVER MARITIME, INC.

Plaintiff Antoinette Harrison, a seaperson, sued Defendant Sea River Maritime, Inc. for negligence under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness after sustaining a left knee injury while working on the S/R North Slope. The Court found the Defendant 90% negligent for inadequate instruction and failure to conduct a Job Hazard Assessment for a new employee. Harrison was found 10% contributorily negligent for her injury. Her claim of unseaworthiness was dismissed. The Court awarded Harrison net damages of $543,583.80, covering past and future economic losses, medical expenses, and subjective losses, with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.

Jones ActMaritime LawSeaperson InjuryNegligenceContributory NegligencePersonal InjuryKnee InjuryDamages AwardedFederal CourtAdmiralty Jurisdiction
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brown v. Cliff's Drilling Co.

Plaintiff Kenneth Brown, Jr. sued Cliffs Drilling Company under the Jones Act and General Maritime Law, alleging negligence and unseaworthiness after suffering a leg fracture in a June 1985 accident on the defendant's barge. The accident involved falling spinning tongs, which the court attributed to the employer's failure to provide proper training, instruction, and supervision, creating an unseaworthy condition. The court found the plaintiff not contributorily negligent in the incident. Judgment was awarded to Brown for $109,990.00 in pain, suffering, and mental anguish, along with prejudgment interest. However, claims for future wage loss and medical treatment costs were denied due to their speculative nature.

Jones ActGeneral Maritime LawUnseaworthinessEmployer NegligenceDrilling Rig AccidentOffshore InjurySeaman's RightsPersonal Injury DamagesFracture InjuryMedical Assessment
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 27, 2001

Emanuel v. Sheridan Transportation Corp.

James Emanuel, an employee of G. Marine Diesel Corp., suffered fatal injuries after falling from a gangway while working on the barge ST 114, owned by Amerada Hess and operated by Spentonbush/Red Star Companies, Inc., which was in dry dock for repairs. His estate sued, alleging negligence and unseaworthiness. The trial court found the defendants negligent and the barge unseaworthy, awarding substantial damages. The appellate court reversed the judgment, finding errors in the jury instructions regarding seaworthiness and negligence under the LHWCA and Jones Act, and remanded for a new trial. The court clarified the limited duties of vessel owners to longshoremen and other harbor workers post-1972 LHWCA amendments.

Maritime LawWorkers' CompensationLongshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA)Jones ActNegligenceSeaworthinessVessel Owner LiabilityShipyard OperationsDry Dock AccidentGangway Safety
References
42
Showing 1-10 of 65 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational