Some states, such as Louisiana, have restrictive statutes against contracting for defense and indemnity provisions. Under federal maritime law, however, these defense and indemnity provisions may be permitted. This distinction creates frequent tension in offshore injury lawsuits between the application of the bordering state law (which may prohibit defense and indemnity provisions) and the application
In offshore operations, whether a contract is deemed “maritime” has major consequences. The classification determines the application of either federal maritime law or state law, along with its oilfield or construction anti-indemnity statutes for states such as Texas or Louisiana. The difference often decides whether the defense, indemnity, and insurance-related obligations in the contract survive
In February of 2020, Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company wrote to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) requesting guidance on whether the Jones Act would work to protect their interests with regard to ongoing offshore wind construction efforts being undertaken off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard. Specifically, they wanted to know whether the
On April 13, 2021, the SEACOR Power, a 234-foot lift boat, encountered a powerful thunderstorm after departing Port Fourchon, Louisiana. The localized severe weather event produced heavy rain, 2- to 4-foot seas, and winds in excess of 80 knots. As the crew of the SEACOR Power attempted to lower the vessel’s legs to the
In maritime law, the “Act of God” defense – also known as force majeure – was once a reliable shield for operators facing liability after a natural disaster. If a storm, hurricane, or earthquake caused damage that no human skill could have prevented, the party could, in theory, escape legal responsibility. But in practice –
While environmental justice initiatives may have experienced a recent administrative curtailment at the direction of the executive branch,[1] recent litigation trends show that EJ-related issues are far from moot. On Wednesday, April 9, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the District Court’s dismissal of Appellants’ EJ-related claims regarding
Among the various duties that Jones Act employers are charged with is the duty to provide its seamen with reasonable medical care. In a recent decision from the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Randle v. Crosby Tugs, L.L.C., the Court considered the extent of this duty and how it may be satisfied. The
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the Writ of Certiorari in the Dutra v. Batterton case, setting the stage for a resolution of the Circuit Split between the US Fifth and Ninth Circuits on whether punitive damages are available to a seaman on an unseaworthiness claim. A more thorough review of the Dutra case
by the Admiralty and Maritime Team
It is now well settled in the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that a seaman cannot recover punitive damages on an unseaworthiness claim. McBride v. Estis Well Service, 768 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2014) (en banc). Specifically, the U.S. Fifth Circuit has held that