U.S. Supreme Court Confirms that Punitive Damages Available in Maritime Maintenance and Cure Claims
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court in Atlantic Sounding Co. v. Townsend, 2009 WL 1789469 (U.S. June 25, 2009) held that a seaman can recover punitive damages on a maritime maintenance and cure case if there is a showing of “willful and wanton” conduct.
In July 2005, Edgar Townsend was allegedly injured while working aboard the tug boat Thomas. His employer, Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc. sought declaratory judgment in a federal district court to determine its obligations toward him under maritime law. Mr. Townsend counterclaimed, alleging in part that Atlantic Sounding’s arbitrary and willful failure to pay maintenance and cure for his injuries justified punitive damages. Atlantic Sounding moved to dismiss and, when the motion was denied, appealed.
The United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit affirmed the district court. The court held it was bound by its prior decision in Hines v. J.A. LaPorte, Inc. There, it concluded a seaman may recover punitive damages when an employer arbitrarily and willfully refuses to pay maintenance and cure for his injuries. It reasoned that the Supreme Court’s decision in Miles v. Apex Marine Corp. did not apply. In that case, the Court held that recovery for "non-pecuniary loss in the wrongful death of a seaman was not available under general maritime law". The court of appeals reasoned that Miles was not "clearly on point" to the facts in Mr. Townsend's case.
On appeal, the Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts, explaining that: "Because punitive damages have long been an accepted remedy under general maritime law, and because nothing in the Jones Act altered this understanding, such damages for the willful and wanton disregard of the maintenance and cure obligation should remain available in the appropriate case as a matter of general maritime law.” The Court also observed that “limiting recovery for maintenance and cure to whatever is permitted by the Jones Act would give greater pre-emptive effect to the Act than is required by its text, Miles [v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19 (1990)], or any of this Court's other decisions interpreting the statute."
In one sense, this case is not controversial since it only purports to maintain the existing rule for maritime cases. However, the Supreme Court's significant reduction in punitive damages in the recent EXXON VALDEZ case suggested that the current Court disfavors punitive damages, particularly in maritime cases. The Atlantic Sounding decision is interesting because shows that, despite its ruling in the EXXON case, the Court remains willing to recognize punitive damages in maritime cases.
A copy of the Court’s opinion can be found at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-214.pdf
