When a maritime proletarian is injured during the naturally of his or her use, a personal injury claim is the best means to obtain fair and precisely compensation for that injury. sometimes, when a personal injury claim is filed under maritime jurisprudence, injured parties are surprised and dismayed to learn that — in reply to his or her claim or lawsuit — the vessel owner filed a limitation of Liability lawsuit, besides known as a limitation suit. These lawsuits can be devastating to the injured party if his or her maritime personal injury lawyer does not have a firm sympathy of the Limitation of Liability Act ( the “ Limitation Act ” ), 32 CFR 536.123. At Gilman & Bedigian, we know this Act and we know how to respond appropriately to it. If you have been injured while working in the maritime diligence, contact Gilman & Bedigian today. We use a comprehensive set about to maritime personal wound claims and are not caught off guard if a defendant files a limitation of Liability claim. Our test attorneys are prepared to immediately defend against a limitation lawsuit so that progress in our own personal injury claim is minimally affected.
The Limitation of Liability Act
In cases of a maritime personal wound or wrongful death claims, the Limitation Act allows vessel owners to limit or restrict indebtedness owed to the injure parties to the rate of the vessel. The Limitation Act dates bet on to 1851, when it was enacted to protect the american shipping industry and its shipowners from lawsuits, that at the time, well exceeded the value of the personal injury cases ’ worth. At that time, communication capabilities were not available as they are nowadays, therefore, if a vessel was involved in a maritime fatal accident, it was difficult to determine precisely what happened, when it happened, why it happened, and who was wholly or partially creditworthy for it. Those concerns no longer exist in the technologically advanced global in which we live, however the Limitation Act still stands as current law.
What vessels are included?
The Limitation Act applies to all oceangoing and non-seagoing vessels used to navigate the ocean american samoa well as inland lakes and rivers. These vessels now include duct boats, barges, and lighters in addition to the larger cargo ships and other types of ships used on the senior high school seas.
recently, in 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the meaning of “ vessel ” to include — for purposes of the Limitation Act — pleasure craft, jets skis and houseboats. See Stewart v. Dutra Const. Co., 543 U.S. 481, 125 S.Ct. 1118 ( 2005 ).
Who can file a Limitation Act claim?
The owners of the above-mentioned vessels are able to file a Limitation Act but only in cases where accidents resulted in personal injuries or other losses, and those accidents occurred on navigable waters of the United States. If the accident happened on a watercourse not considered to be navigable, the vessel owner can not file a Limitation befit. by and large speaking, an owner of a vessel is entitled to limit liability, and according to Court interpretation, “ owner ” can include parties in summation to the register owner of the vessel indeed long as he or she exercises control condition or dominion over the vessel. Owners include :
- Persons with legal title to the vessel.
- President and sole shareholder of the vessel owning company.
- United States as owner pro hac vice of Coast Guard auxiliary boats, which become “public vessels” when assigned to government service.
- Owners of the vessel at the time of the casualty but who sold the vessel by the time of litigation.
- Charterers who “…navigate such vessel at his own expense, or by his own procurement shall be deemed the owner of such vessel.”
Those who do not qualify to make a call under the Limitation Act include those, like vessel managers, who do not exercise sufficient control over the vessel to be considered an owner pro hac frailty.
When is an owner prohibited from filing a Limitation Act claim?
An owner of a vessel can not file a Limitation courtship merely because a claim for personal injuries or unlawful end has been filed against him or her. There are two personal wound claims that are not subject to the limitation of liability :
- Wages owed to seamen; and
- Maintenance and cure benefits for an injured seaman.
additionally, the Limitation of Liability Act addresses only vessel owners, therefore, lone seamen and choose few other maritime workers who are injured during the run of his or her employment while on a water vessel are submit to the limitations that this kind of lawsuit provides for vessel owners. All early nautical wound and unlawful death claims that arise out of accidents not on a water vessel but within the nautical industry will not be impacted by the limitations this Act imposes on personal injury claims.
Procedures to Limit Liability
There are two ways the vessel owner can attempt to limit liability for personal wound or wrongful death claims : ( 1 ) the owner can assert the Limitation Act offensively by commencing a limitation continue in a union district court ; or ( 2 ) the owner can assert the Limitation Act defensively by raising limitation as an approving defense in either a state or union court proceeding. If the early is the method used, then the claims are consolidated into a unmarried union forum. therefore, if your personal injury or wrongful death claim was in a state court, strategically filed there for the aim of better benefits and a jury trial, then your scheme can be turned top if you are forced to consolidate your claim under federal legal power. In club for the limit proceeding to commence, the vessel owner must file the call in a proper venue and must do so within the Statute of Limitations.
Proper Venue
The only court that has jurisdiction over a Limitation proceeding is a federal zone court in admiralty. If the claim is filed in an improper venue, then the woo has discretion to ( 1 ) dismiss the limitation proceed ; or ( 2 ) transmit it to a district woo in admiralty where is could have and/or should have been filed originally.
Read more: How Maritime Law Works
If the claim is filed in an improper venue, the claimant with the personal injury or wrongful death become can besides use the improper filing as a department of defense to the restriction proceeding.
Statute of Limitations & Written Notices
timely file of a restriction of liability claim is six months from the time the vessel owner received written notice that you — the personal injury or wrongful death claimant — filed your claim. Your written notice must inform the vessel owner ( 1 ) the details of the incident or accident ; and ( 2 ) the vessel owner appears to be or is considered to be the creditworthy party for the damage in question. There are two tests that can determine if the you — the injured plaintiff — provided proper written notice :
- Notice is sufficient if (1) the vessel owner was informed of the actual or potential claim; (2) that the claim may exceed the value of the vessel and pending freight; and (3) the claim is subject to limitation.
- Notice is sufficient if (1) it demands a right; (2) blames the vessel owner for any damage or lose; and (3) calls upon the vessel owner to provide all that is due to the claimant.
If the restriction call is not filed within six months, then three consequences may result ( 1 ) the limit proceed will be dismissed ; ( 2 ) the order to require consolidation of claims in one federal forum may be lifted ; and/or ( 3 ) the stay precluding multiple actions may be lifted.
Disadvantages of Limitation Act for Injured Parties
There are two specific advantages to vessel owners who file a limitation claim, and these advantages are disadvantages to you, the injured party. The two disadvantages are : ( 1 ) the concursus ; and ( 2 ) abnegation of the right to a jury test.
The Concursus
once a limitation call is filed, the court will issue a stay of all proceedings against the vessel owner for claims originating from the like incident. The bide will stay in place until the result of the limitation go. All claims will be consolidated for litigation in a individual go, and there will be a period of time set — known as a monition time period — so that all claimants can file their claims in the single limitation continue. The aim of the concursus is twofold : ( 1 ) it allows assets to be combined ; and ( 2 ) it prioritizes the claims according to which ones exceed the prize of the vessel. At the time a limitation claim is brought, the vessel owner must provide funds that cover the value of the vessel, known as the limitation fund. The concursus is necessary because claimants would differently be competing for larger portions of a limited fund where the limit fund is insufficient to pay all potential claims. If the vessel owner is able to limit his or her liability, the competing claimants will be limited to their pro rata shares, which is likely not to cover the full damages each claimant has.
Denial of the Right to a Jury Trial
Because a limitation go is a case in admiralty, there is no mighty to a jury test. consequently, if your title was made under express jurisdiction, your correct to a jury trial will effectively be denied. The “ save to suits ” article, however, saves the claimant all other remedies to which the claimant is differently entitled, such as a jury test under country legal power. consequently, to reconcile the notion that a limitation continue is a case in admiralty, and consequently, does not permit trial, and the “ saving to suits ” notion, courts provide exceptions to the federal court ’ s exclusive admiralty legal power. generally, there means, federal judges will decide on liability and then revert the case back to the country court so that the issue of damages can be litigated and, ultimately, decided by a jury.
The Burden of Proof & Limitation Proceedings
There are specific burdens of proof that arise out of a limitation proceed. This singular charge of proofread occurs between the vessel owner and the claimant ( randomness ). The relationship between their respective burdens of proof is as follows :
Read more: Should You Buy CTRM Stock?
- Claimants’ has the onus to demonstrate that the personal injuries or wrongful death was caused by the negligence or vessel unseaworthiness; the claimant must establish liability to him or her by the vessel owner. Once the claimant satisfies his or her burden of proof, the onus shifts to the vessel owner.
- The vessel owner must prove lack of privity or knowledge. Privity and knowledge are established where the means of obtaining knowledge exists, or where reasonable inspection would have led to the requisite knowledge. Therefore, if the vessel owner can prove that the injury or loss occurred without his or her knowledge or privity, the claimant’s source for recovery shrinks and will likely become inadequate.
Privity and cognition are imprecise terms, and a court can frequently give or take on what it deems satisfactory terms according to if the vessel owner is a corporation or an individual. individual owners are normally given more indulgence. They are not required to supervise the vessel at ocean or in larboard, and if they hired personnel to do the lapp, the vessel owners will not be held accountable for the hire personnel ’ second negligence. There are, of run, exceptions to this general discover. Corporations, on the other hand, are held to a higher bar and, as such, face a more difficult fourth dimension disproving its cognition or privity in the event of your injury or loss. Because the total of your recompense depends on the vessel owner proving your injury occurred without his or her cognition or privity, your lawyer must be resourceful and thoughtful to uncover attest of the vessel owners knowledge, and therefore, be able to defend successfully against a restriction claim.
Resourceful Maritime Personal Injury Trial Lawyers in Maryland
Working on a urine vessel in the maritime diligence is one of the most hostile and dangerous conditions a person can occupy. If you or a love one is injured during the course of your work, you may be shocked to realized that the vessel owner has filed a limitation of Liability claim against your that could drastically affect skill of fair and fair compensation. Gilman & Bedigian trial attorneys are quick to counter such claims, to defend your rights, and to ensure you obtain the compensation you deserve. Contact us online or call our law office at ( 800 ) 529-6162 for a free reference. And remember : you do not pay us until we help you secure a successful call or lawsuit in your favor .