Admiralty—Status of the Sieracki-Seaman After the 1972 Amendments to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act

Note by Rodney A. Seydel, Jr.

Plaintiff, a linehandler employed by the Panama Canal Company, sustained injuries while preparing defendant's vessel for passage through the Panama Canal lock system. He brought suit against the vessel owner on grounds of negligence and unseaworthiness, and the vessel owner sought indemnity from plaintiff's employer, claiming breach of the warranty of workmanlike performance. Panama Canal Company contended that plaintiff's recovery against it was limited by the exclusive liability provision of the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA). The district court agreed and, citing the 1972 Amendments to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA), denied the vessel owner's motion to strike the Company's defense. On interlocutory appeal the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and held that a FECA employee, not covered by the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, can invoke the Sieracki unseaworthiness action against a vessel owner who, if held liable, can bring the Ryan indemnity action against the longshoreman's employer. Aparicio v. Swan Lake, 643 F.2d 1109 (5th Cir. 1981).


About the Author

Rodney A. Seydel, Jr.

Citation

57 Tul. L. Rev. 379 (1982)