Understanding Post-Injury Arbitration Agreements in Jones Act Claims
Exploring the benefits and considerations of post-injury arbitration agreements in Jones Act claims, this meeting discusses why such agreements are preferred, legal precedents supporting their use, potential risks and challenges, and key elements to consider when drafting an agreement. Presenters provide industry and legal perspectives on the topic.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
MLA Inland Waters and Towing Committee Meeting Avoiding a Jury Trial with Jones Act Seamen: Post-Injury Arbitration Agreements May 1, 2019
Presenters: Overview: Marissa M. Henderson Ventker Henderson Norfolk, Virginia Industry Perspective: Bill Neubrand Dominion Maritime Adjusters Baltimore, Maryland Legal Perspective: Thomas M. Canevari Freehill Hogan & Mahar, New York
Claims arbitration agreements why do we want them?
Facing Juries in Jones Act Claims
But I hate arbitration. Agreed! So draft an agreement you can live with: Sole arbitrator Pick your ADR provider Expedited (i.e. simpler) rules
Consideration? Above and beyond Advance payment of amounts due to the seaman for his lost wages (ie. damages recoverable under the Jones Act) Pay now and get a benefit or pay later anyway!
Are they legal? Banned under the Federal Arbitration Act? No Precursor Case: Endris v. Ecklof Marine Corp, 199 AMC 556 (SDNY 1998) Terrebone v. K-Sea Transp. Corp., 477 F3d 271, 279 (5th Cir. 2007) In re Schrieber v. K-Sea Transp. Corp., 879 N.E.2d 733, 737 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007) Barbieri v. K-Sea Transp. Corp., 566 F. Supp. 2d 187, 193 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) Harrington v. Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc., 602 F.3d 113, 121 (2nd Cir. 2010) Vane Line Bunkering, Inc. v. Hooper, No. 16-21348, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184372, *6 (S.D. Fla. July 6, 2016)
Wards of the admiralty Substantive rights waived, like a release? FAA s policy in favor of arbitration
Other risks, challenges? First year Contracts class But challenges to validity of the contract as WHOLE (ie fraud) are heard by arbitrator in first instance: Vane Line Bunkering, Inc. v. Hooper, 2016 U.S. Dist LEXIS 184372 (S.D. Fla. 2016)
TAKEAWAYS? It can be done if done well, can be effective Get something for the $$$ - quid pro quo Learn the tricks (best practices) from pioneers Savings are real
Time for a word from those who have used these agreements and successfully litigated them .
Bill Neubrand Maritime and casualty investigation and adjusting/claims management Marine and cargo surveyor Vane Brothers Risk Manager 2004 -2018
Tom Canevari Legal counsel to K-SEA Transportation Drafted early form of claims arbitration agreements Successfully litigated CAA s for K-SEA
Get started now Tom, Bill and I can work with you! Drafting custom CAAs In house education/training RMs, claims handlers, C-Suite, underwriters Actual claims management using CAAs (Bill and DMA)
Presenters: Overview: Marissa M. Henderson Ventker Henderson Norfolk, Virginia Industry Perspective: Bill Neubrand Dominion Maritime Adjusters Baltimore, Maryland Legal Perspective: Thomas M. Canevari Freehill Hogan & Mahar, New York
