Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Gizoni
116 L. Ed. 2d 405, 502 U.S. 81, 1991 U.S. LEXIS 7061 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A maritime worker whose occupation is listed in the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) is not automatically precluded from filing suit as a 'seaman' under the Jones Act. If a worker can raise a genuine factual question about their status as a member of a vessel's crew, that question must be resolved by a jury.
Facts:
- Southwest Marine, Inc. operated a ship repair facility using several non-powered floating platforms and barges.
- Byron Gizoni was employed by Southwest Marine as a rigging foreman.
- Gizoni performed his work on these floating platforms and would ride them as tugboats towed them into position alongside vessels being repaired.
- As part of his duties, Gizoni occasionally served as a lookout, gave maneuvering signals to the tugboat operator, and handled lines to secure the platforms.
- Gizoni sustained disabling leg and back injuries when he fell after his foot broke through a thin wooden sheet covering a hole in the deck of a platform.
Procedural Posture:
- Byron Gizoni filed a claim for and received medical and compensation benefits from Southwest Marine under the LHWCA.
- Gizoni then sued his employer, Southwest Marine, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, bringing claims under the Jones Act.
- The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Southwest Marine, ruling as a matter of law that Gizoni was not a seaman and that the LHWCA provided his exclusive remedy.
- Gizoni, as appellant, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's decision, holding that genuine issues of fact existed regarding Gizoni's status as a seaman that a jury should decide.
- Southwest Marine, as petitioner, was granted a writ of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve a conflict among the circuit courts.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA), which provides an exclusive remedy for enumerated maritime occupations, preclude a worker in one of those occupations from bringing a personal injury action as a 'seaman' under the Jones Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice White
No. The LHWCA does not preclude a worker in an enumerated occupation from bringing a claim under the Jones Act. The Jones Act and the LHWCA are mutually exclusive remedies, as the LHWCA explicitly excludes from its coverage 'a master or member of a crew of any vessel,' which is a refinement of the term 'seaman' under the Jones Act. Therefore, a worker's eligibility for a remedy depends on their status as a seaman, not on their job title or the fact that their occupation is enumerated in the LHWCA. The determination of seaman status is a fact-specific inquiry based on the employee's connection to a vessel in navigation, and if reasonable persons could differ on the question, it must be submitted to a jury. Gizoni presented sufficient evidence to create a jury question as to whether he was a seaman.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the principle that the Jones Act and the LHWCA are mutually exclusive remedies determined by a worker's status, not their job title. It prevents employers from using a worker's job classification as an automatic bar to a Jones Act claim, which typically offers a more substantial recovery than the LHWCA's workers' compensation scheme. The ruling ensures that the fact-intensive question of 'seaman status' remains a matter for the jury in borderline cases, thereby protecting access to the courts for maritime workers who, despite their job title, have a significant connection to a vessel.
Unlock the full brief for Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Gizoni