Maritime Injury Attorney Blog

In my opinion the disaster involving the Costa Concordia, involving the loss of lives, not only requires us to focus in on safety issues aboard the mega cruise ships, but also emphasizes the needs for changes in the favorable laws cruise ship companies enjoy.

All of the cruise ship companies register in foreign countries, and register their ships in foreign countries. The flags of these vessels are referred to as flags of convenience because the cruise ship companies register these vessels in foreign countries in order to enjoy favorable laws, including avoiding United States taxes.

What are the many favorable laws that the cruise ship companies enjoy? First, let's focus in on claims involving passengers onboard cruise ships.

The first thing a passenger must be concerned with is the passenger ticket issued by the cruise line. It is referred to as a contract of passage. However, it is not really a contract, although it is considered legally to be one. It is merely a number of provisions which disclaim and limit the liability of the cruise ship company. It grants no rights to the passengers. It takes rights away.

In the passenger ticket, the cruise ship company sets forth the deadline to file a lawsuit against them arising out of personal injury or death. The deadline is one year from the date of the incident. This is an extremely short statute of limitations. Most statute of limitations involving personal injury and wrongful death claims are 2 to 4 years. The cruise ship company enjoys the benefit of being able to limit the time a passenger can file a lawsuit against them to a very short one year period of time. In addition, the cruise ship company requires written notice to be provided of such a claim within 6 months.

Continue reading "Costa Concordia Disaster Shows the Needs to Change Favorable Laws Cruise Ships Companies Enjoy " »

At least as to claims involving economic and environmental losses, a United States District Court Judge in New Orleans made a significant ruling, finding that the United States Oil Pollution Act did not bar claimants from seeking punitive damages as the companies had argued.

Under the General Maritime Law, punitive damages have historically been available to claimants in all types of cases. However, over the years certain federal statutes have been interpreted as precluding an award of punitive damages. The Jones Act, a federal statute that applies to seamen in personal injury and wrongful death claims, has been interpreted not to allow for the recovery of punitive damages. Similarly, the Death on the High Seas Act, has been interpreted as precluding an award of punitive damages.

However, recently the United States Supreme Court in the case of Atlantic Sounding Co., v. Townsend, 129 S.Ct. 2561(2009), addressed whether a seaman could recover punitive damages under the General Maritime Law for the willful and arbitrary failure to provide maintenance and cure. The argument on the part of the shipping company was that punitive damages were no longer available under the General Maritime Law.

There has been a conflict in the decisions regarding the availability of non-pecuniary damages under the General Maritime Law when a statute does not speak directly to the claim in question. In Townsend, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that there was no bar to the recoverability of punitive damages on the part of seamen at least with respect to maintenance and cure actions. The Supreme Court did not find any such bar in any of the statutes that govern claims brought by seamen. The statutes were not applicable to maintenance and cure claims. Therefore the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that punitive damages survived under the General Maritime Law, at least for maintenance and cure claims.

In this recent decision by the federal judge in New Orleans, the federal judge similarly ruled that the United States Oil Pollution Act did not have any bearing on the General Maritime Law claims for punitive damages. The statute was silent and thus Congress did not occupy the area in question. Accordingly, the plaintiffs, with respect to the economic environmental losses, may now pursue claims under the General Maritime Law for punitive damages. The question remains whether seamen who were injured, or the families who are pursuing wrongful death claims, can also seek punitive damages under the General Maritime Law, or whether the prohibition of punitive damages read into the Death on the High Seas Act and the Jones Act will prevent such.

This is a major victory for claimants. Due to the amount of money involved, one can anticipate an appeal will be made from this federal judge's ruling.

Our personal injury and wrongful death firm continues to be safety advocates for passengers and crewmembers injured at sea.

We have all heard the term "loopholes", but the tax loopholes Carnival Cruise Lines has taken advantage of give new meaning to the word. Everyone knows the huge presence Carnival Cruise Lines has in the United States, and the benefits it reaps from services they receive in the United States. This would include airlines, roads, security protection, custom officers, Coast Guard protection and other governmental services.

It was recently reported that over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines paid total corporate taxes which would include Federal, State and Local and Foreign, an amount equal to only 1.1 percent of the 11.3 Billion Dollars in profits it had earned. Carnival is able to legally avoid most taxes.

The article in the New York Times reported the United States has the worst corporate tax code in the world. The official tax rates are higher than most other countries.

Why is Carnival able to pay so little in taxes? The explanation was that there is a provision which lets some shipping companies legally operate overseas. In the case of Carnival Cruise Lines they incorporate in Panama, enabling them to avoid taxes. This is despite the fact that their executives sit in plush offices in Miami, and millions of passengers are boarding their profit making ships on a daily basis daily here in the United States.

Why does Carnival choose Panama? There are very favorable laws in Panama for corporations such as Carnival, resulting in Carnival paying very little money in any type of type of taxes. At the same time a big corporation like Carnival is able to earn billions of dollars from their passenger cruise ship business, largely from United States passengers, Carnival Cruise Line is part of a huge lobbying effort to restrict rights of both passengers and crewmembers injured aboard their ships. Yes, that is true. On the one hand they are reaping the huge benefits and advantages of being able to operate their business here in the United States, while paying minimal taxes, earning billions of dollars, and at the same time using their profits to lobby Congress to pass favorable laws for the cruise ship industry. This lobbying effort includes efforts to prevent amendments to the outdated and archaic Death on the High Seas Act, which severely limits the damages available to family members who have lost loved ones aboard a cruise ship due to the negligence of the cruise ship company.

Continue reading "Amazingly Carnival Cruise Lines Pays Only 1.1 Percent of 11.3 Billion Dollars in Profits" »

The Carnival cruise ship Valor came to the aid of three Americans that were aboard a battered boat off the Cuban coastline.

The small boat encountered violent winds and waves which led to it becoming stranded. The passenger cruise ship came to the rescue of the three men and their cat. Guests aboard the Carnival ship watched in awe from all decks as the three men were pulled to safety. Some of the passengers captured the exciting rescue on video.

Passengers commented how it was a miracle that the cruise ship was able to save these men. Some passengers knew instantly that something was wrong because it was a rough day at sea and the small boat seemed out of place. Thankfully, the three men were okay and suffered no injuries.

Another tragic incident involving a young crewmember occurred onboard the Holland-American Cruise ship, the MS Volendam. A 29 year old Indonesian crew member fell into the waters while working with lifeboats aboard the ship. There was a malfunction of equipment, which resulted in a cable breaking and the crew member fell into the water. Another crewmember was rescued and did not suffer major injuries. However the other crewmember could not be located and it was presumed he drowned.

Crew members have difficult and dangerous jobs. If they are injured or are killed during their work, the crew members, or their family members, have rights under the Jones Act and general maritime law to recover damages caused by negligence and unsafe conditions. Unlike state land based workers, who are limited to worker's compensation benefits, crew members have very special laws that apply to their claims. These laws recognize the dangerous occupation of a crew member and their dependence on the ship owner for a safe working environment. Our wrongful death firm has handled thousands of cases involving crew members who have been injured or killed onboard a cruise ship.

The FBI concluded its investigation into the disappearance of a Florida woman who fell from a cruise ship on Christmas night two years ago. The investigation concluded there was no foul play involving a passenger going overboard the Norwegian cruise ship the Norwegian Pearl.

When the FBI began its investigation they were trying to determine whether the passenger Jennifer Ellis-Seitz, 36, from Winter Haven had actually fallen overboard by accident, possibly jumped or was pushed or thrown overboard. She and her husband Raymond Seitz Jr. were celebrating their first wedding anniversary on a seven day cruise on the Norwegian Pearl.

Ellis-Seitz was a freelance writer in Central Florida. Her family released a statement stating that she was previously having emotional problems and had probably chosen to end her life.

The cruise line was able to provide surveillance footage showing the passenger falling about 15 stories into the waters east of Cancun, Mexico.

Her husband and her mother, who was also onboard, searched the ship looking for her for more than an hour before reporting her missing to the ship's security. Before Norwegian Cruise Line security called the U.S. Coast Guard they searched the entire vessel for the missing passenger who had disappeared during her anniversary cruise.

Continue reading "FBI Finds No Signs of Foul Play in Passenger Going Overboard" »

It is hard to believe that it has been since July of 2005 that George Smith was reported as missing during his honeymoon cruise with his wife, Jennifer. Since his disappearance, the FBI has been actively investigating the cause of his disappearance. There were many issues that surfaced following his disappearance regarding how the initial investigation was conducted by the cruise line. It has also been widely reported that the Smith family were at odds with Jennifer Hagel. It is was reported that Jennifer Hagel was critical of the parents of George Smith because Jennifer Hagel said that the parents never took into the possibility that George Smith's disappearance could have been related to intoxication and taking prescription medications, not foul play.

From the beginning, the Smith family has suspected foul play which resulted in the disappearance of George Smith. Our firm represented the Smith family. We are very pleased to hear of the settlement agreement that the Smith family was able to reach after the case proceeded to the Probate Court in Connecticut following an initial settlement agreement that was obtained in the wrongful death case.

Once a settlement agreement was reached for the wrongful death, the Probate Court had jurisdiction to determine whether the settlement was a reasonable settlement. The Smith family openly criticized the initial settlement agreement. However, the Probate Judge ruled that the settlement was reasonable and approved the initial settlement agreement. The Smith family, through their probate attorneys in Connecticut, appealed the ruling of the Probate Court. Prior to any disposition on the ruling whether the Probate Court was correct in approving the settlement as being reasonable, a final settlement agreement was reached among the Smith Family, Jennifer Hagel and Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines, Ltd.

While this may end any litigation against the cruise lines for the disappearance of George Smith, the Smith family has made it very clear they will continue in their relentless efforts to get answers to their questions and do justice on behalf of George.

Our wrongful death firm is proud of our contributions in getting this case the public attention, as well as the attention of our United States Congress, showing the need to evaluate the number of the disappearances and other criminal acts occurring aboard cruise ships, as well as the need to address the Maritime laws governing the major cruise ship operators.

Continue reading "George Smith Family, Jennifer Hagel and Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines, Ltd., Reach a Final Settlement Agreement Arising Out of the Disappearance of George Smith " »

An oil platform exploded at approximately 9:00 a.m. on September 2, 2010, approximately 200 miles west of where the BP Oil explosion occurred. There were 13 crewmembers aboard the oil platform, who all were tossed into the water, and were floating there until the rescuers arrived. One of those crewmembers was rushed to a hospital. The Coast Guard would not confirm whether any oil had actually leaked into the water. Although such a fire aboard an oil platform might be considered something that happens somewhat frequently, and not receive a lot of attention in the past, the BP Oil spill has caused this recent explosion to receive national attention. This explosion again raises the issue which environmental groups are arguing, which is that the current federal moratorium on deep water offshore drilling is necessary. This particular platform was not drilling and was not in deep water.

A letter from House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Rep., Henry A. Waxman, who is part of the investigation of the BP Oil spill, wrote the following in the Los Angeles Times "in the wake of the BP catastrophe, this is an extremely disturbing event," and "I call on the administration to immediately redouble safety reviews of all offshore drilling and platform operations in the Gulf and take all appropriate action to ensure safety and protection of the environment."

Another article in Politico states that Reps. Bart Stupak and Ed Markey "are leading the investigation in two subcommittees" of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The story states that "the explosion will almost certainly bolster Democrats' contention that off-shore drilling is not yet safe enough," and Republicans have "said offshore drilling should not be halted, but safety measures should be improved. This incident will likely give both sides more ammo going into an election season where Democrats are furiously trying to paint Republicans as friends with Big Oil."

Finally, the Wall Street Journal reported that this recent explosion may hamper the oil industry's efforts to portray the BP Oil spill as a fluke event.

The dangers of working on an offshore patrolling platform have become even more apparent in the wake of the BP Oil spill disaster which resulted in serious injuries and deaths.

Continue reading "Another Oil Rig Explosion Occurs 80 Miles Off the Louisiana Coast" »

In a letter to the editor of the Washington Post, published on August 11, 2010, attorney Gibson Vance, who is current President of the American Association for Justice, writes that the current Maritime Laws hamper oil spill settlements. He emphasizes that not only must Congress lift the Seventy-Five Million Dollar cap that is currently present in the Oil Pollution Act, which will severely limit BP's responsibility for the economic damages suffered on the Gulf Coast, but he also urges Congress to amend the Death on the High Seas Act and the Limitation of Liability Act. Otherwise, he says, the residents of the Gulf Coast, as well as small businesses there, will end up footing the bill for BP's disaster.

As stated in his letter to the editor, DOSHA severely limits recovery for families of anyone killed on the high seas when DOSHA is applicable, including the families of the eleven men who died in the Deep Water Horizon rig explosion. DOSHA limits the families' recovery to economic loss only, which normally translates to the costs of the funeral, as well as proven loss of financial support and services the family member would have been provided.

The Limitation of Liability Act, which is an outdated law from 1851, is an act that the company Trans Ocean is trying to use to limit their liability to the value of the Deep Water Horizon after the incident, which has been calculated at under Twenty-Seven Million Dollars.

Our maritime and wrongful death firm has handled many cases involving the Limitation of Liability Act, which requires cases to be pursued in Federal Court without a jury trial. Not only does the act deprive litigants from their right to a jury trial in many cases, but the fund that is available for recovery if the ship owner is successful at limitation is often times inadequate to adequately compensate the victims.

The Deep Water Horizon disaster is a perfect example of the inequities involved when the Limitation of Liability Act is applicable. The same applies to the Death on the High Seas Act limitations.

Hopefully when Congress does return from its recess, it will address these antiquated Maritime Laws not only to assure that the victims of the BP Oil spill are adequately compensated, and that BP Oil is held fully accountable, but by amending these laws all Maritime lawsuits in the future will not be subject to these antiquated and unfair Maritime Laws.

I previously reported in my post, Tugboat Crashes Into Passenger Boat Causing Deaths And Personal Injuries about an incident involving a duck boat tour in Philadelphia. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported "lawyers for the families of two young Hungarian visitors who died in the duck boat accident last month filed a lawsuit today against the tour operator, Ride the Ducks, and the tug boat operator, K-CSCA Transportation Partners."

In the article, the attorney for the family said the victims died by drowning when they were trapped underneath the water by the duck boat's canopy.

Of critical importance is the fact that a National Transportation Safety Board report that was issued in 1999 involving another duck boat accident said that these canopies on these amphibious vessels posed a safety threat and should be removed.

As for the other Defendants sued in this wrongful death action, K-CSCA Transportation Partners, it is alleged they were operating the tug boat, Caribbean Sea, which was pushing a barge that struck the duck boat.

Another key factor cited by the attorney who filed the lawsuit is that he received an anonymous tip that that the helmsman aboard the tug boat had lowered the volume of the marine radio so that he was able to take a cell phone call. This caused him not to hear the distress calls that were coming from the disabled duck boat.

This Maritime wrongful death lawsuit also alleges punitive damages. As I have previously discussed, punitive damages are not available under the Death on the High Seas Act, which applies when wrongful deaths occur outside the territorial waters of the United States. Whether punitive damages may be recovered in a Maritime wrongful death action even when the Death on the High Seas Act does not apply may depend on whether the Court will look to state wrongful death actions to supplement the general Maritime Law. There is support under the general Maritime Law for the recoverability of punitive damages in a Maritime personal injury or wrongful death case when the Death on the High Seas Act is not applicable. This is another complexity of the Maritime Laws that needs to be carefully analyzed.

An interesting article appeared in the South Florida Sentinel on August 9, 2010. It reported on the passage of the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2010, which I previously discussed in another post, President Obama Signs Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act Legislation Into Law For Added Safety Protections For Cruise Ship Passengers.

As stated by the Sentinel, the new law was passed due in part to increased pressure as a result of the public notoriety received after passenger George Smith IV went missing during a honeymoon cruise aboard a passenger cruise ship. After his disappearance, there was a lot of criticism regarding the laws that governed the cruise ship's responsibility for reporting the incident, as well as the investigation of the incident. Our firm represented the parents of George Smith IV and in addition to the wrongful death case on behalf of the parents of George Smith IV seeking compensation under the Death on the High Seas Act, the parents were also pursuing a claim against the cruise ship company for the manner in which the investigation of the incident was handled. There were allegations that the cruise ship mishandled the investigation, resulting in lost evidence, preventing the family from ever finding out what truly happened to their son.

It was somewhat of a novel theory against the cruise ship company brought by the parents regarding the mishandling of the investigation. Our maritime and wrongful death firm argued the situation was similar to a police agency botching an investigation, resulting in the failure to solve the potential crime. We were able to find legal precedent for suing an investigating agency for the failure to properly preserve evidence.

As a result of botching an investigation, family members are often left without closure as to what happened to their loved ones. The damages suffered by family members from the lack of closure are greater than any economic loss that can be measured easily.

Although a Florida Court ruled that the parents could not pursue an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against the cruise line based on the manner in which they handled the investigation, citing Federal Law that had previously held that a cruise line did not have a duty to investigate in the first place, the parents continued to be relentless in their pursuit for answers from the cruise line company. The FBI continues to maintain an open investigation regarding the matter.

Continue reading "Does the New Maritime Law, The Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2010 Really "Beef Up Cruise Safety" As Reported By South Florida Sun Sentinel" »

I previously reported in my post, Legislation To Amend Death On The High Seas Act And Other Key Maritime Laws Postponed, about legislation that is currently before the Senate that will eliminate harsh and outdated Maritime laws, including laws that allow limitation of liability for vessel owners, as well as operators of oil rigs. The legislation which is postponed also would eliminate the harsh restriction on damages for wrongful death that occurs on the high seas, and would allow increased compensation to the victims' families involved in the BP Oil spill.

We are hopeful that the Death on the High Seas Act will be amended to apply to all vessels on the high seas, and would include claims involving wrongful death of passengers aboard cruise ships. The cruise ship industry is lobbying heavily to be excluded from any amendments which would increase the amount of compensation to families who lose a loved one on a cruise ship due to wrongful death.

The Senate is in recess until September 13, 2010. Hopefully there will be a vote on the current provisions amending the Maritime laws. In the meantime, during August, the American Association for Justice (AAJ), formally the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, have advised of the importance to set up meetings with Senators in your home state.

During the summer district work period for Congress, members of Congress often hold what is referred to as Town Hall Meetings, in their district and which is open to all of their constituents.

This is a great opportunity to meet members of Congress and voice your support for important legislation, including the current legislation that is pending regarding amending the harsh and outdated Maritime laws.

Continue reading "Senate Goes On Recess Postponing Vote on Admiralty/Maritime Laws" »

As a maritime wrongful death lawyer, I have been following the BP oil spill disaster very closely. The battle continues in Washington to seek changes in the Maritime compensation laws available to the families of victims killed on the high seas. The Death on the High Seas Act severely restricts compensation to the family members of victims killed aboard a vessel, including oil rigs, when the death occurs on the high seas.

The compensation provided to the families includes only a calculation based on future income loss less the amount the individual who died would have personally consumed, including how much of his income would have been taken away in taxes. Often times, this leaves very little compensation to the family members.

In a moving and compelling interview on NBC Nightly News, two of the widows of victims killed on the Deep Water Horizon Oil Rig told NBC Nightly News about the harshness and unfairness with these laws. The Maritime laws provide no compensation for their children, and without any justification treat the family members different than if the deaths had occurred elsewhere, or not on a vessel. The interview clearly demonstrates that there is absolutely no rational basis for the archaic limitations contained in the Death on the High Seas Act.

As stated in the segment from NBC Nightly News, the politics involved is causing a delay in the amendment of this harsh law, including heavy opposition from the cruise ship industry.

Many passengers and crewmembers we have represented have faced the harsh reality that their wrongful death claims were subject to these harsh limitations. It is always a difficult task as a Maritime personal injury attorney to explain to families of victims killed onboard a ship on the high seas that the law doesn't recognize non economic damages. When we are asked to explain the rationale behind the Death on the High Seas Act, we simply cannot do so because there is no rationale other than protection of special interests, such as the cruise ship industry and the shipping industry in general, including oil rigs. The BP Oil spill disaster has demonstrated the need to no longer provide protections to these special interest groups, and to hold them fully accountable for complete compensation for wrongful deaths.

Our firm is keeping a close eye on the new legislation that has been proposed to amend the Death on the High Seas Act, and we will advise on any developments.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Legislation currently pending with the Senate to address various Maritime Laws, including the Limitation of Liability Act, the Jones Act, and the Death on the High Seas Act, has been postponed due to opposition to the legislation which was passed by the House.

The deep water horizon BP Oil spill has brought attention to the specialty of Maritime Law. Maritime Law issues have been discussed daily in the newspapers, and lawmakers are getting their first taste of special Maritime laws that have been on the books for decades.

Some of the Maritime Laws being addressed are ancient, outdated, and inconsistent with our system of justice which is designed to fully and fairly compensate victims of accidents and deaths caused by negligence or fault of another.

One of the laws seeking to be changed is the existing 75 Million Dollar cap for those who own offshore facilities that are responsible for oil spills, which is a limitation under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The BP Oil spill has brought to light the need to reform this law and other laws.

The Death on the High Seas Act and the Jones Act, both restrict the type of damages that injured seamen or surviving family members of those killed at sea may collect from shipowners. The Death on the High Seas Act also applies to passengers, including passengers aboard cruise ships. When someone loses a loved one aboard a vessel or ship, the survivors are limited to recovering economic damages such as the loss of support. They are not allowed to seek punitive damages regardless of the recklessness of the conduct, nor are they allowed to recover what the law refers to as loss of society damages, which are the non economic damages which are designed to compensate for the anguish and sorrow of losing a loved one.

Continue reading "Legislation To Amend Death On The High Seas Act And Other Key Maritime Laws Postponed" »

Recently, on a Fox television show John Stossel was interviewed. John Stossel was regularly on the television show 20/20, and has for many years attacked personal injury lawsuits and personal injury attorneys. I am not sure of his motivation for doing so. I heard rumors that he had a brother who was a doctor who had been sued and maybe he has a bias against being held accountable for mistakes. It was interesting in the clip that he is asked by the interviewer about a time when he sued a boxer for hitting him. A perfect statement was made about that by the interviewer. She said you can hate lawyers until you need a lawyer.

It is interesting that he publishes such a story in the wake of the BP oil spill disaster, which more than ever demonstrates the need for full accountability, and the necessity of all types of lawsuits, including personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. Companies must be held accountable for their mistakes, and thank God for personal injury and wrongful death lawyers helping families and victims of accidents.

Our firm has helped thousands of victims of accidents, including all types of personal injury cases, accidents, wrongful death, sexual assaults, food poisoning, slip and fall accidents, automobile accidents, and victims of medical negligence.

Of course companies do not want to be held accountable, and the best defense is a good offense. Therefore, attack the lawyers and all personal injury lawsuits, as this newscaster is attempting to do. We have helped thousands of victims receive fair and just compensations for claims against the cruise ship companies for their wrongful acts, including helping families who lost loved ones due to a disappearance onboard a cruiseship. Our firm represented the parents of George Smith, the honeymooner who disappeared during his honeymoon cruise aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship. The parents utilized the legal system not just to seek compensation for their tragic loss, but in an attempt to obtain critical and useful information in order to find out what happened to their son. We have helped other families who have lost loved ones onboard passenger cruise ships.

When I first watched the interview of John Stossel attacking personal injury lawsuits, it infuriated me because he simply gives a few examples of what may be an abuse of the system, as is present in any system. However, he fails to focus on the entire purpose of personal injury lawsuits and wrongful death lawsuits, which is to hold people accountable through our court system by holding them responsible for their negligence, and causing positive change in our society by making products safer, cruise ships safer, drugs safer, and providing for an overall safer society.

Continue reading "Newscaster Attacks Personal Injury Lawsuits" »