No Punitive Damages Allowed Against 3rd Parties Defendant: Eastern District Declines to Address Circuit Split
No Punitive Damages Allowed Against 3rd Parties Defendant: Eastern District Declines to Address Circuit Split
by: Penny Kissinger
Rinehart v. Nat’l Oilwell No. 15-6266, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60270 (E.D. La. 2017)The Eastern District Court recently ruled on a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment for punitive damages filed by the defendant in Rinehart v. Nat’l Oilwell. Rinehart, a Jones Act seaman filed the personal injury case under the Jones Act and general maritime law for unseaworthiness, claiming third party gross negligence when a pallet fell from National Oilwell’s crane onto the back of his head. Rinehart’s injuries required emergency medical treatment and left him with severe neurological and physical impairments.The Court briefly discussed the uncertainty of whether punitive damages were allowed under general maritime law following the original ruling in Mc Bride v. Estis Well Srvs.,731 F.3d 505 (5th Cir. 2013), in which the Fifth Circuit held that they were allowed. According to the trial judge, the subsequent en banc decision, 768 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2014), however, clearly established that Scarborough v. Clemco Industries, 391 F.3d 660 (5th Cir. 2004), was a binding precedent prohibiting a punitive damages award to a seaman under either the Jones Act or general maritime law.The Court granted the defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment but did not address the defendant’s request to preserve his appeal.
