Claris Law Legal Blogging Community

Name:

E-mail:

Phone Number:

Zip Code:

Your Question:

Editor: Rod Sullivan
Profession: Maritime Attorney

Category: Unseaworthiness and The Jones Act

Ever since Miles v. Apex Marine the admiralty bar has been in a state of disarray concerning what damages are recoverable under the doctrine of unseaworthiness. Most circuits have held that a loss of consortium claim (loss of consortium is a wife's claim for the loss of her husband's "sex, society, and services" when her husband is hurt) cannot be brought by the wife of a Jones Act seaman. I think they are wrong, but that's why they are appellate court judges and I am an attorney.

Their theory is that the Jones Act preempted the field and set forth the exclusive remedy for seamen injured while working on a vessel. If they are right, then why did maintenance and cure survive the Jones Act and Miles v Apex? Besides, the Jones Act is only the seaman's remedy. If his wife has suffered damages, the Jones Act never sought to limit her remedies.

An interesting development is that some courts, notably the 5th Circuit, have permitted to stand without comment awards of loss of consortium to wives of seamen suing the owners of ships (not the Jones Act employer) which injure seamen.

If you find this to be inconsistent, so what? It is the right outcome.