Note by Barry W. Ashe
EDITOR'S NOTE:
During the publication process of this casenote, the United States Supreme Court rendered its decision in Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Perini North River Associates, 51 U.S.L.W. 4074 (U.S. Jan. 11, 1983) (No. 81-897). Reversing the decision of the Second Circuit, the Court held that Churchill, a marine construction worker injured while performing his job upon navigable waters, but without a nexus to traditional maritime activity, was “engaged in maritime employment”' for purposes of coverage under the amended Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. The Perini Court adopted a construction of the LHWCA similar to that devised by Judge Tate in the noted case. Though a petition for writ of certiorari is pending before the Court in American Workover, Inc. v. Boudreaux, 51 U.S.L.W. 3349 (U.S. Oct. 4, 1982) (No. 82-605), certiorari will probably be denied in view of the consistency of the reasoning in the Boudreaux and Perini cases. Therefore, the analysis employed in Boudreaux, buttressed by the Supreme Court's pronouncement in Perini, will remain dispositive of the “maritime employment”' question.
Plaintiff, an oil field specialty worker employed by Aquatek, Inc., was injured while on board defendant AWI's movable drilling barge in Louisiana's territorial waters. Pursuant to section 905(b) of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA), he sued the vessel owner, AWI, for its negligent failure to provide him with a safe place to work. Alleging negligence on the part of Aquatek, AWI instituted a third-party demand against Aquatek for indemnification should plaintiff recover against AWI. Aquatek, seeking to shield itself from the third-party demand, answered that plaintiff was covered by the LHWCA and that section 905(b) grants immunity from liability to employers of injured workers covered under the Act for injuries caused by the negligence of the vessel. The district court dismissed the third-party demand, finding that LHWCA coverage embraced plaintiff and made effective Aquatek's immunity from indirect liability to plaintiff via the indemnification of AWI. AWI appealed and, in its panel decision, the Fifth Circuit affirmed. On rehearing en banc, the court affirmed the panel decision and held that the plaintiff was engaged in maritime employment within the meaning of the LHWCA and that, consequently, his employer was immune from liability to the vessel owner. Boudreaux v. American Workover, Inc., 680 F.2d 1034 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), petition for cert. filed, 51 U.S.L.W. 3349 (U.S. Oct. 4, 1982) (No. 82-605).
About the Author
Barry W. Ashe.
Citation
57 Tul. L. Rev. 682 (1983)