Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 04-13-2023

Case Style:

Robert O. Coley v. Trawler Cahterine Lane, Inc.

Case Number: 4:22-CV-69

Judge: Louise Wood Flanagan

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (New Hanover County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan

Click Here For The Best Wilmington Personal Injury Lawyer Directory

If no lawyer is listed, call 918-582-6422 and MoreLaw will help you find a lawyer.

Defendant's Attorney: Stevensone L. Weeks

Description: Wilmington, North Carolina personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a Jones Act theory under 46 U.S.C. 688. which provides:

Recovery for injury to or death of seaman
(a) Application of railway employee statutes; jurisdiction

Any seaman who shall suffer personal injury in the course of his employment may, at his election, maintain an action for damages at law, with the right of trial by jury, and in such action all statutes of the United States modifying or extending the common-law right or remedy in cases of personal injury to railway employees shall apply; and in case of the death of any seaman as a result of any such personal injury the personal representative of such seaman may maintain an action for damages at law with the right of trial by jury, and in such action all statutes of the United States conferring or regulating the right of action for death in the case of railway employees shall be applicable. Jurisdiction in such actions shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located.
(b) Limitation for certain aliens; applicability in lieu of other remedy

(1) No action may be maintained under subsection (a) of this section or under any other maritime law of the United States for maintenance and cure or for damages for the injury or death of a person who was not a citizen or permanent resident alien of the United States at the time of the incident giving rise to the action if the incident occurred-

(A) while that person was in the employ of an enterprise engaged in the exploration, development, or production of offshore mineral or energy resources-including but not limited to drilling, mapping, surveying, diving, pipelaying, maintaining, repairing, constructing, or transporting supplies, equipment or personnel, but not including transporting those resources by (a) 1 vessel constructed or adapted primarily to carry oil in bulk in the cargo spaces; and

(B) in the territorial waters or waters overlaying the continental shelf of a nation other than the United States, its territories, or possessions. As used in this paragraph, the term "continental shelf" has the meaning stated in article I of the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf.

(2) The provisions of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not be applicable if the person bringing the action establishes that no remedy was available to that person-

(A) under the laws of the nation asserting jurisdiction over the area in which the incident occurred; or

(B) under the laws of the nation in which, at the time of the incident, the person for whose injury or death a remedy is sought maintained citizenship or residency.

"The Jones Act, also known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, is a federal statute that regulates maritime commerce in the United States. The law was passed in response to concerns about the decline of the U.S. merchant marine after World War I. The Jones Act requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on U.S.-flag ships that are built and owned by U.S. citizens or companies.

The Jones Act has been controversial since its passage. Supporters of the law argue that it is necessary to protect the U.S. maritime industry and to ensure that the U.S. has a strong merchant marine in case of war or other national emergency. Opponents of the law argue that it is protectionist and that it raises the cost of goods and services for consumers.

The Jones Act has been challenged in court on a number of occasions. In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law in a case called American Maritime Partnership v. United States. However, the Court also ruled that the law could be challenged on the grounds that it violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The Jones Act remains a controversial law. It is likely to continue to be challenged in court in the future."

Google Bard

Outcome: 04/12/2023 19 STIPULATION of Dismissal by Trawler Catherine Lane, Inc. (Weeks, Stevenson) (Entered: 04/12/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case