Horne v. Weeks Marine, Inc. and Atlantic Sounding
Date Decided: May 7th, 2010
Originally Filed in: Louisiana (Federal)
Decided by: Louisiana Eastern District Court (Federal)
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge: Judge Davis
Citation: Horne v. Weeks Marine Inc., 2010 WL 1838689 (5th 2010)
Background:
Horne was a Jones Act seaman and member of the crew of the dredge the TOM JAMES which was owned by Weeks Marine, Inc. When Horne was injured, however, Atlantic Sounding was Horne's employer. After his injury, Horne filed claims of negligence under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness. Horne suffered injuries from a fall while changing out the engine bearings in the TOM JAMES. Horne was using a board propped into the main engine on one end and on a step stool near the other end to gain access to the engine bearings. As a result of his fall, Horne suffered a bulging disc that did not require surgery and is being managed by pain medication.
Horne was a Jones Act seaman and member of the crew of the dredge the TOM JAMES which was owned by Weeks Marine, Inc. When Horne was injured, however, Atlantic Sounding was Horne's employer. After his injury, Horne filed claims of negligence under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness. Horne suffered injuries from a fall while changing out the engine bearings in the TOM JAMES. Horne was using a board propped into the main engine on one end and on a step stool near the other end to gain access to the engine bearings. As a result of his fall, Horne suffered a bulging disc that did not require surgery and is being managed by pain medication.
Issues:
Did the Trial Court err in dismissing the case?
Did the Trial Court err in dismissing the case?
Held:
The Fifth Circuit began its analysis by laying out the findings of the district court. The district court found the following: (1) Horne had participated in changing the engine bearings twice before using the same set up without incident and (2) the utilization of the board and step stool as a means of moving heavy engine parts did not render the TOM JAMES unseaworthy, as this set up was reasonably fit for its intended purpose. Further, the district court held that the board was not intended to be sat upon, that Horne knew this, and that he did in fact sit on the board leading to its collapse and his fall.
Since the district court's findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and that the board was reasonably fit for its intended purpose of assisting in the bearing replacement, its conclusion that the TOM JAMES was seaworthy is correct. In regards to Horne's negligence claim, the Fifth Circuit relied on the same evidence to dismiss any negligence on behalf of Atlantic Sounding.Comments:
Under the seaworthiness doctrine, things about a ship, whether the hull, the decks, the machinery, the tools furnished, the stowage, or the cargo containers, must be reasonably fit for purpose for which they are to be used otherwise a vessel will be considered unseaworthy.
Under the seaworthiness doctrine, things about a ship, whether the hull, the decks, the machinery, the tools furnished, the stowage, or the cargo containers, must be reasonably fit for purpose for which they are to be used otherwise a vessel will be considered unseaworthy.
<< PREVNEXT >>
