Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. v. Garris, 532 U.S. 811 (2001)

Facts

  • Christopher Garris performed sandblasting work aboard a vessel berthed in navigable waters while the vessel was under the control of Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corporation.
  • Garris was injured during the work and later died from his injuries.
  • The administratrix of Garris’s estate filed a federal admiralty action seeking wrongful-death damages under general maritime law, alleging that negligence caused Garris’s death.
  • The complaint did not invoke a specific federal wrongful-death statute.

Issues

  1. Whether general maritime law provides a wrongful-death cause of action for death resulting from the negligent breach of a maritime duty of care.
  2. Whether recognizing such an action is inconsistent with federal statutory schemes addressing maritime injury and death (including the Jones Act, DOHSA, and the LHWCA).

Decision

  • The Supreme Court affirmed the Fourth Circuit.
  • The Court held that the general maritime wrongful-death action recognized in Moragne is available for negligent breach of a maritime duty of care.
  • The Court rejected a rule that would allow wrongful-death recovery for unseaworthiness but not for negligence.
  • The Court concluded that recognizing the negligence-based claim was consistent with Congress’s maritime statutes because the claim was an application of established maritime negligence principles within the Moragne framework.
  • The case could proceed on a general maritime wrongful-death theory based on negligence.
  • General maritime law recognizes a wrongful-death cause of action for death caused by violation of maritime duties, including negligence.
  • There is no rational basis, for general maritime wrongful-death purposes, to distinguish negligence from unseaworthiness when both are maritime duties.
  • Judicial development of general maritime law must account for congressional enactments in the field, but applying the Moragne wrongful-death action to negligence does not improperly conflict with statutory regimes such as the Jones Act, DOHSA, or the LHWCA.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court held that a wrongful-death action under general maritime law extends to deaths caused by negligent breach of a maritime duty of care, allowing the estate’s admiralty negligence claim to go forward notwithstanding the absence of an expressly applicable federal wrongful-death statute.