Article by Paul N. Daigle
In land-based law, the liability of a landowner to a third party may depend upon the relationship between the two. Employees of the landowner may be entitled to remedies different from remedies to which the business invitee is entitled. As in land-based law, the liability of a vessel owner will depend upon the legal category in which admiralty law places the third party. This article will attempt to discuss vessel owners' liability to those persons who do not fall in the categories of seamen and harborworkers.
In addition to the category of person, vessel owner liability may depend upon other factors such as the nature and service of the particular vessel. For example, the liability of an operator of a cruise vessel to passengers is different from the liability of the owner of private pleasure crafts to passengers. Another factor which may affect the liability of a vessel owner depends on whether, under the facts, federal maritime or state law applies. Although it is beyond the scope of this paper to examine the liability of vessel owners under the law of each particular state, selected cases will demonstrate the importance of determining the proper forum. As will be discussed later, state law may allow defenses under a guest-passenger statute, the doctrine of assumption of risk, family/spousal immunity, or contributory, as opposed to comparative, negligence. Closely related to the question of whether the casualty occurred in state waters or navigable waters of the United States is the question of whether an admiralty court will decline jurisdiction based upon the reasoning of Executive Jet and its progeny. Although this article is not the first to explore the field, it will hopefully serve the bar as an update and collect together other writings in the field.
About the Author
Paul N. Daigle. B.A. 1961, Stanford University; J.D. 1968, University of California, Hastings College of Law; Maritime Law Association—Executive Committee 1981-84; Chairman, Admiralty Section, Oregon State Bar.
Citation
55 Tul. L. Rev. 1104 (1981)