Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Dore (P) was working on a crane mounted on the artificial island and being used to unload a barge. The crane collapsed and toppled over onto the barge, killing Dore (P). His widow and her three children brought an action alleging their own and the decedent's residency in Louisiana and the negligence of the firms that manufactured, installed, and serviced the crane. The suit was brought under the 'General Maritime Laws, the Death on the High Seas Act, . . . Article 2315 of the [Louisiana Code] and under the other laws of the United States and the State of Louisiana.' Dore (P) sought $ 670,000 in damages. The judge determined that the Seas Act was the only remedy. Thus, Dore's (P) damages were limited to pecuniary loss. The state statute would have allowed recovery for additional elements of damage. The Fifth Circuit affirmed. Rodrigue (P) case, was performing a test on a drill pipe. He was high on the derrick rising above the artificial island and fell from it to his death on the floor of the structure. His widow and two children brought three actions. One was an admiralty under the Seas Act; the other two were civil actions against the owner and insurer of the drill rig, and the owner of the stationary platform. The civil actions were brought under the Lands Act and Article 2315 of the Louisiana Revised Civil Code. The trial court dismissed the insurer, who had been made a party to one of the civil actions pursuant to the Louisiana direct-action statute, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 22:655. It was reasoned that the accident did not occur within the State of Louisiana so Louisiana law did not apply. The District Judge dismissed the consolidated civil action because the Seas Act provided a remedy and that under such circumstances the Lands Act would not make the inconsistent state remedy applicable. The Fifth Circuit affirmed. Ps appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co