Harbor Tug and Barge Company v. John Papai et Ux. (520 U.S. 548)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 12, 1997 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 520 U.S. 548 · 117 S. Ct. 1535
- Decided
- May 12, 1997
- Term
- October Term 1996
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Kennedy
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. Adjudication to determine whether a maritime employee is a seaman under the Jones Act, 46 U. S. C. App. § 688(a), or a maritime employee covered by the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA), 44 Stat. (pt. 2) 1424, as amended, 33 U. S. C. § 901 et seq., continues to be of concern in our system. The distinction between the two mutually exclusive categories can be difficult to implement, and many cases turn on their specific facts. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in this case that there was a jury question as to whether an injured worker was a Jones Act seaman. Granting the employer’s petition for a writ of certiorari, we brought two questions before us. The first is whether an administrative ruling in favor of the employee on his claim of coverage under the LHWCA bars his claim of seaman status in the Jones Act suit he wishes to pursue in district court. The second is whether this record would permit a reasonable jury to conclude the employee is a Jones Act seaman. We resolve the second question in the employer’s favor and, as it is disposi-tive of the case, we do not reach the first. On the question of seaman status, there is an issue of significance beyond the facts of this case. Our statement in an earlier case that a worker may establish seaman status based on the substantiality of his…
Excerpt of a 21,049-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.