Part of being a maritime lawyer is following up closely on the several judicial rulings and court decisions that shape maritime and admiralty law.  This month and through the next, I will be looking a little closer at important decisions and rulings over the past year, that impact admiralty and maritime law cases.

The status of self employed fishermen continues to be a matter of disagreement, and the Supreme Court appears to be in no hurry to clear all the confusion around this important issue.  The Supreme Court has in the past defined nonseafarers as those who are “neither seamen covered by the Jones Act nor longshore workers covered by the Longshore and Harbor Worker’s Compensation Act.”  The definition of a “nonseafarer “is strongly tied with the Supreme Court’s decision in the case involving Yamaha Motor Corporation USA v Calhoun.  In that decision, the Court found that families of non-seafarers who are killed are eligible for wrongful death damages under state law. These claims will not be bound by restrictions on non-pecuniary damages imposed by federal maritime law.

That case involved a 12-year-old girl killed in a Jet Ski accident in Puerto Rico while driving a jet ski manufactured and distributed by Yamaha. Her parents filed action against Yamaha based on the wrongful death laws of Pennsylvania.  In Yamaha’s case, the deceased was a 12-year-old girl who was determined as a nonseafarer, and was therefore, found eligible for state law wrongful death remedies.

However, in Trinh v Dufrene Boats Inc., an appellate court in Louisiana ruled that a self employed fisherman was a nonseafarer. This has created some confusion about the status of these persons.

That case involved a 12-year-old girl killed in a Jet Ski accident in Puerto Rico while driving a jet ski manufactured and distributed by Yamaha. Her parents filed action against Yamaha based on the wrongful death laws of Pennsylvania.  However in Yamaha’s case, the deceased was a 12-year-old girl who was determined as a nonseafarer, and was therefore found eligible for state law wrongful death remedies.

The confusion continues because the Supreme Court continues to remain obscure on the matter. In the Yamaha decision, the Supreme Court spells out that a nonseafarer is one who is not a seaman or a longshore worker or a person otherwise engaged in maritime trade. Under this definition, a self employed fisherman may not be a Jones Act seaman or a longshore worker, but he is involved in a maritime trade, and therefore, must be placed in the seafarer category.

Expect more updates on this blog as this important issue continues to be played out.

Maritime lawyer Brian Beckcom is a Board Certified trial lawyer, whose primary focus is the representation of injured Jones Act seamen, tankermen, galleyhands, deckhands, drillers, oilrig workers, offshore workers and other maritime workers in accidents in Texas, around the country and in international waters.