Louisiana Maritime Lawyer Sues MADON Corporation on Behalf of Injured Seaman

Posted in Louisiana Maritime News,Maritime Lawsuits on June 25, 2013


Louisiana maritime lawyer, Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP, represents a 47-year-old man from Brooklyn, Connecticut who was injured on the M/V GULF FREEDOM while employed by DEFENDANT, MADCON Corporation.


Plaintiff was employed by MADCON Corporation. During his employment with MADON Corporation, Plaintiff was injured twice. The first incident occurred on October 6, 2010. At that time, Plaintiff was carrying groceries onto the M/V GULF FREEDOM by way of the gangway. While walking on the gangway, the gangway gave in a manner that caused Plaintiff to twist his body and injure his back.

On July 18, 2012, Plaintiff was ascending the stairwell leading up to the bridge of the M/V GULF FREEDOM when suddenly the handrail came off of its attachment to the wall causing Plaintiff to fall.


Plaintiff is a 47 year old married resident of Brooklyn, Connecticut. Plaintiff is currently disabled due to this incident.


October 6, 2010: Injury to back requiring that Plaintiff to undergo epidural steroid injections in order to better deal with pain as well as painful physical therapy. Since Plaintiff’s back pain is continuing, his orthopedic surgeon has recommended a discectomy fusion at L5/S1. Currently, his orthopedic surgeon.

July 18, 2012: Right knee injury requiring surgery Plaintiff to undergo surgery. Plaintiff also sustained a tear of his rotator cuff.


MADCON Corporation maintains their corporate headquarters in Slidell, Louisiana.


Unlike nearly every other body of law, the Jones Act allows an injured worker to sue his employer for the employer’s or a co-worker’s negligence occurring during work. An employer has a duty to exercise care by providing a reasonably safe work environment, training about safety in the workplace, and providing adequate equipment. The Jones Act allows an injured worker to sue his employer for lost wages, mental and emotional anguish, and pain and suffering.

A maritime employer owes a seaman a higher negligence duty than in the usual employer-employee relationship, and the employer if its breach of that duty contributed to the seaman’s injury. Even if the seaman assumed a risk of injury, compensation under the Jones Act is not reduced.