The Salty Barrister

I grew up around folks that tended toward self-sufficiency. A spare something was generally on hand. You didn't come into the dock too hot because rudders and clutches could be ornery. You checked the depth gauge against your plotted position to make sure things looked about the same. You didn't run your fuel tanks down, rely on a radar, or run off your entire battery bank. You get the drill, and that approach has faired me well. So what with the wisdom of my increasing years, I'm damn unhappy about the Loran-C system being unplugged. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-navigation-system-shelved,0,939770.story)

We're all GPS happy, intoxicated by its ease, accuracy and relatively cheap price tag. I get it. The problem with GPS is that it relies on satellites and, look, I'm no engineer but if a satellite works anything like my cell phone, you can probably shut them off with as little as a key stroke. That's the problem. Everyone from the commercial fisherman to the weekend warrior is bombing around the coast on the wings of a GPS signal. Cut that signal and my money says you're going to have big problems. Ferries, harbor patrol units, and, I'd venture, even the Coast Guard might be up a creek. And without Loran-C what's the alternative? Dead reckoning? Maybe like sailors of old, you can pull up your sounding weight to see what kind of sea floor the wax base trapped. (I can assure you that that aged talent of being able to divine one's location from a sample of the sea floor has slipped into history's ether.)

Reports suggest that turning off Loran-C will cost some 256 jobs. The price of keeping Loran-C going is reported to be $36 million in 2010 and $190 million for the next five years. (Serious money to be sure, but let’s not venture down the path of comparing it to the alleged bonuses the financial sector is taking home. And, in case you'd forgotten but by way of perspective, the TARP bailout is in the range of $700 billion!)

Yea, I am angry. These are the easy decisions and we're not getting them right. Tell you what, China is. They have two Loran-C type systems. Makes you wonder what we're thinking, huh? If you have a moment, give your local representative a call or go to http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/LORAN/default.htm and send them a burst of the kind of common sense that landed a thousand ships safely back in the harbor.

Underway and making way (without my Loran-C).

--- JKF

Comments (1) | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Here's to keeping you all up to date.Yesterday , the United States Supreme Court issued a decision on a maritime personal injury issue. Generally speaking, a seaman is entitled to maintenance (a form of stipend) and cure (medical care) when injured.

Despite some arguments otherwise, the Supreme Court has now held that a seaman can seek an award of punitive damages when the maintenance and cure obligation is willfully and wantonly disregarded. The case, for those legal eagles out there, is Atlantic Sounding Co. v. Townsend, 08-214.

Underway and making way.

--- JKF

Comments (1) | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Alright, settle down. I know you've been waiting to learn all about the Jones Act, but we don't offer that kind of information. We're like a chart in a brochure that gives you some orientation, points out a few prominent features and makes you want to buy the NOAA Chart. Still, that doesn't mean we can't give you some walking around knowledge . . .

First off, remember that the maritime law generally affords special or different protections to crew members. For instance, the Jones Act gives seamen the right to sue for monetary damages arising from personal injuries caused by an employer. The Jones Act was adopted in 1920 and prior to that date a crewmember could only recover against an employer if it could be shown the vessel was unseaworthy.

Now, you're no doubt wondering, how does the Jones Act define "seaman" and my response is that Congress left for lunch during that portion of legislative activity because it's undefined. Yup, case law has been left to navigate these narrows leaving, as you can well imagine, a rich history.

In short, whether or not you qualify as a seaman is a fact-driven inquiry which focuses on the circumstances of your employment. Contribution to the function of a vessel in navigation that is both substantial in terms of duration and nature is the typical focus of any examining court. Duration of employment and the nature of the employee's activities are prime considerations.

Seaman status is not a snapshot kind of thing. In other words, the relationship is viewed from a more long-term perspective such that the fellow who's aboard for the afternoon to fix the electronics is not likely to obtain Jones Act status and, vice-versa, the seaman injured ashore is not likely to lose his/her status.

Next up . . . we talk about the Jones Act and recreational boating.

Underway and making way.

--- JKF

Comments (1) | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

What the hell is going on? That's pretty much the gist of a comment raising a good question as to why admiralty jurisdiction was found in connection with a vessel arrest and seizure on the Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri. Here's why I think the Court got it right.

To set the stage, there's some older case law that declines to find admiralty jurisdiction on the Lake of the Ozarks because it's not presently navigable. (We'll assume that statement is accurate today, but it might not be. In other words, maybe the Court determined that the Lake is currently navigable which would likely give rise to admiralty jurisdiction.)

Ok, so what we know is that a lawsuit seeking a vessel's arrest was brought by a bank claiming an interest in a vessel probably arising from a financing agreement; perhaps, a Preferred Ship Mortgage. As a purely off-the-cuff deduction, the Court may have determined that a maritime contract was at issue which may have given it traction to invoke admiralty jurisdiction. In broad speak, when it comes to contracts and admiralty jurisdiction things aren't always so tightly linked to locality. In fact, just last year the Eighth Circuit (the Court of Appeals for this Lake's locale) reached a similar conclusion in connection with a policy of marine insurance.

At any rate, that's the best response and only idea I have at the moment. What I'm going to do is poke around some on the Court's docket (it's currently down for maintenance) and I'll see if I can't better understand the Court's reasoning. Like a Pan-Pan broadcast, keep listening for a further update and my thanks to Captain Charlie Meyer for raising the question. You can read Capt. Meyer's blog entry regarding the case here.

Underway and making way.

--- JKF

Comments (1) | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

When's summer coming, huh? Around here, it's cold enough to make you think we're still in March.

I read today that David "Fred" Brownell, an old stalwart of the New England boating scene passed over the bar (follow this link for his obituary); somehow learning that news seems fitting what with the gray skies and chill. If you've ever spent any time kicking around a boat yard, the name is probably familiar. A lot of my high-school and college years I burned-up climbing over and around one of his Brownell boat trailers. With their hydraulics and being submersible, they were a gold standard. Neat guy. No college, and no engineering courses and yet he could apparently design and build like nobody's business. We're all so tightly packaged these days with labels, degrees and certificates, makes you wonder whether there's any of that stock left . . .

You know, early in his career, Brownell built boats and so, he may have had the benefit of the Vessel Hull Design Protection Act. (Google this and take a look yourself: 17 U.S.C. § 1301, et seq.) This Act is unique to the maritime industry and provides copyright protection to certain vessel hull designs. These legal waters are little like sailing the Maine Coast, sometimes complicated, but worth the effort. Believe me, I'll put you to sleep if I get any deeper into the Act's mechanics, but it's the kind of thing worth storing away in case your cocktail-hour doodling yields a winning design.

Underway and making way.

--- JKF

Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink