11th Circuit Questions DOHSA Interpretation But Holds Steady Course
Lacourse v. PAE Worldwide Incorporated, 2020 WL 6735275, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 36021 * (11th Cir., Nov. 17, 2020)
The widow of a retired Air Force Lt. Col. sued in Florida state court to recover damages for her husband’s death during maneuvers when his plane crashed in the Gulf of Mexico more than 12 nautical miles from the Florida shore. The decedent was employed by a contractor to the Department of Defense. The suit was removed to federal court on several grounds: the federal officer removal statute, diversity of citizenship and DOHSA.
The defendant brought several Motions for Partial Summary Judgment: (1) that DOHSA limits recovery to pecuniary damages; (2) that the state claims for breach of warranty and breach of contract are preempted by DOHSA and to strike the request for a jury trial ; and (3) finally, to dismiss the suit based on the “government contractor” defense. The trial court granted all motions and dismissed the suit.
The panel of the 11th Circuit affirmed but questioned the interpretation of DOHSA, specifically the language that DOHSA is applicable when the “death of an individual is caused by wrongful act, neglect, or default occurring on the high seas.” The panel agreed that the fault in this case occurred on land (alleged failure to follow maintenance requirements for the aircraft); and the plain reading of the Act would lead one to conclude that DOHSA would not apply. Judge Newsome as author of the majority opinion noted that were it “writing on a clean slate” the court would agree with the plaintiff. Nonetheless, it felt compelled to follow precedent citing Offshore Logistics, Inc. v. Tallentire, 477 U.S. 207 (1986). He also wrote a concurring opinion, joined by Judge Wilson, stating that while the court must follow precedent, he does “so holding my nose, as DOHSA’s plain language is squarely to the contrary.” (2020 WL 6735275 at *9) The trial court’s grant of Summary Judgment that DOHSA limited recovery to pecuniary damages was affirmed.
The panel also affirmed the grants of summary judgments that DOHSA preempts any state law claims and that the defendant was entitled to summary judgment on the “government contractor” defense.
Will writs be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court?
