Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska, Inc.
| Decision Date | 09 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. 87407–7.,87407–7. |
| Citation | 300 P.3d 815,177 Wash.2d 399 |
| Parties | Ian DEAN, Petitioner, v. The FISHING COMPANY OF ALASKA, INC. and Alaska Juris, Inc., Respondents. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
John W. Merriam, Attorney at Law, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.
Michael Alan Barcott, Megan Elizabeth Blomquist, Attorneys at Law, Seattle, WA, for Respondents.
Bryan Patrick Harnetiaux, Attorney at Law, Spokane, WA, George M. Ahrend, Ahrend Albrecht PLLC, Ephrata, WA, amicus counsel for Washington State Association.
Christopher Weldon Nicoll, Noah Jaffe, Nicoll Black & Feig PLLC, Stewart Andrew Estes, Keating, Bucklin & McCormack, Inc., P.S., Seattle, WA, amicus counsel for Washington Defense Trial Lawyers.
[177 Wash.2d 402]¶ 1 Ian Dean worked aboard a fishing vessel owned by The Fishing Company of Alaska (FCA). While aboard the vessel, Dean experienced pain in his hands and neck. After Dean left the vessel, he sought medical treatment and FCA began paying Dean maintenance and cure as required by general maritime law. After paying Dean's maintenance and cure for just over three years, FCA stopped paying when it obtained the opinion of a physician that Dean's injuries had reached maximum cure. At the time when FCA cut off Dean's maintenance and cure, Dean's own physician opined that Dean's injuries could benefit from additional treatment. Dean sued FCA in King County Superior Court. Dean also filed a motion asking the trial court to order FCA to resume paying maintenance and cure. The trial court applied a summary judgment standard to Dean's motion and denied the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed. We reverse the Court of Appeals.
¶ 2 In May and June 2006, Dean worked as a fish processor aboard the Alaska Juris, a fishing vessel owned by FCA. During that time, Dean worked in quarters with a low overhead so that Dean, who is 6 feet, 3 inches tall, had to work stooped over. Soon after leaving the ship, Dean sought medical treatment for pain in his neck, wrists, and hands. A physician diagnosed Dean's neck pain as muscle strain and prescribed over-the-counter medication. Dean did not seek additional treatment for his neck pain until May 2008, at which time a different physician recommended physical therapy and light massage. Dean's hand pain was diagnosed as carpal tunnel syndrome. Dean had carpal tunnel release surgery in 2008 and 2009.
¶ 3 FCA began paying Dean maintenance and cure soon after Dean left the ship in June 2006. In August 2009, FCA hired Dr. Thomas Williamson–Kirkland to examine Dean's neck. Dr. Williamson–Kirkland stated that his examination revealed Dean's neck to be normal. Furthermore, Dr. Williamson–Kirkland stated, while it was possible Dean's neck had been injured on the Alaska Juris, any injury “would have resolved within several months of leaving the vessel.” Clerk's Papers at 41. Shortly after Dr. Williamson–Kirkland's examination, FCA stopped paying maintenance and cure. In October 2009, Dr. Alfred Aflatooni, Dean's treating physician, opined that Dean could benefit from additional treatment for both his hand and neck injuries.
¶ 4 Dean sued FCA in King County Superior Court for personal injury damages under the Jones Act, [177 Wash.2d 404]46 U.S.C. § 30104, and for maintenance and cure under general maritime law. Prior to trial, Dean filed a motion to reinstate maintenance and cure requesting that the court order FCA to resume paying Dean maintenance and cure because Dean's neck injuries had not reached maximum cure. Dean's motion was supported by a declaration of Dr. Aflatooni. The trial court treated the pretrial motion as a motion for summary judgment. The trial court ruled that, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party—FCA—there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether Dean's injuries had reached maximum cure. Thus, the trial court ruled that Dean was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law and did not order FCA to resume paying Dean maintenance and cure.
¶ 5 The parties proceeded to arbitration and the arbitrator found in favor of FCA. Dean and FCA filed a stipulated judgment in favor of FCA contingent on Dean's appeal of the maintenance and cure issue. The stipulated judgment provided that the outcome of the current appeal would determine the prevailing party.
¶ 6 The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court. Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska, Inc., 166 Wash.App. 893, 272 P.3d 268 (2012). The Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not err by applying the summary judgment standard to Dean's motion to reinstate maintenance and cure. The Court of Appeals suggested that instead of bringing a motion to reinstate maintenance and cure, Dean could have sought a temporary preliminary injunction under CR 65(a) or moved for an expedited evidentiary hearing under CR 42(b). This court granted Dean's petition for review. Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska, Inc., 175 Wash.2d 1017, 290 P.3d 133 (2012).
¶ 7 Under general maritime law, when a shipowner stops paying maintenance and cure to an injured seaman, does a trial court err by applying the summary judgment standard to the seaman's motion to reinstate maintenance and cure?
¶ 8 Although federal judicial power “extend[s] ... to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction,” this court has concurrent jurisdiction to adjudicate this case under the “saving to suitors” clause. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1; see28 U.S.C. § 1333(1) ; Endicott v. Icicle Seafoods, Inc., 167 Wash.2d 873, 878, 224 P.3d 761 (2010) .
¶ 9 The application of an incorrect legal standard is an error of law that we review de novo. Jongeward v. BNSF Ry. Co., 174 Wash.2d 586, 592, 278 P.3d 157 (2012) (citing State v. Breazeale, 144 Wash.2d 829, 837, 31 P.3d 1155 (2001)). We also review de novo an order granting summary judgment. Sheikh v. Choe, 156 Wash.2d 441, 447, 128 P.3d 574 (2006). Summary judgment is appropriate if “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact” and “the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” CR 56(c). Because the issue presented in this case involves whether summary judgment was the correct legal standard to apply to Dean's motion to reinstate maintenance and cure, we review this issue de novo.
¶ 10 Under general maritime law, a shipowner has a duty to provide maintenance and cure to a seaman who “becomes ill or is injured while in the service of the ship.” Vella v. Ford Motor Co., 421 U.S. 1, 3, 95 S.Ct. 1381, 43 L.Ed.2d 682 (1975); Clausen v. Icicle Seafoods, Inc., 174 Wash.2d 70, 76, 272 P.3d 827 (2012). “Maintenance” is a per diem living allowance for food and lodging comparable to what the seaman is entitled to while at sea; “cure” is payment of medical expenses incurred in treating the seaman's injury or illness. Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor, 303 U.S. 525, 528, 58 S.Ct. 651, 82 L.Ed. 993 (1938); Clausen, 174 Wash.2d at 76, 272 P.3d 827. The shipowner's duty to pay maintenance and cure “continues until the seaman ... reaches the point of maximum medical recovery.” 11 Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Admiralty and Maritime Law § 6–28, at 393 (4th ed. 2004) (citing Farrell v. United States, 336 U.S. 511, 522–23, 69 S.Ct. 707, 93 L.Ed. 850 (1949)). “ ‘Maximum medical cure’ is reached when the seaman recovers from the injury, the condition permanently stabilizes or cannot be improved further.” McMillan v. Tug Jane A. Bouchard, 885 F.Supp. 452, 459 (E.D.N.Y.1995).
¶ 11 Maintenance and cure is an “ancient doctrine.” Farrell, 336 U.S. at 520–21, 69 S.Ct. 707;see alsoSchoenbaum,supra, § 6–28, at 376 (). A seaman's right to maintenance and cure was first recognized in the United States by Justice Story. See Harden v. Gordon, 11 F.Cas. 480 (C.C.D.Me.1823) (No. 6,047); Reed v. Canfield, 20 F.Cas. 426 (C.C.D.Mass.1832) (No. 11,641). Justice Story articulated the underlying policy of maintenance and cure as follows:
Seamen are by the peculiarity of their lives liable to sudden sickness from change of climate, exposure to perils, and exhausting labour. They are generally poor and friendless, and acquire habits of gross indulgence, carelessness, and improvidence. If some provision be not made for them in sickness at the expense of the ship, they must often in foreign ports suffer the accumulated evils of disease, and poverty, and sometimes perish from the want of suitable nourishment. Their common earnings in many instances are wholly inadequate to provide for the expenses of sickness; and if liable to be so applied, the great motives for good behaviour might be ordinarily taken away by pledging their future as well as past wages for the redemption of the debt ... On the other hand, if these expenses are a charge upon the ship, the interest of the owner will be immediately connected with that of the seamen. The master will watch over their health with vigilance and fidelity. He will take the best methods, as well to prevent diseases, as to ensure a speedy recovery from them. He will never be tempted to abandon the sick to their forlorn fate; but his duty, combining with the interest of his owner, will lead him to succor their distress, and shed a cheering kindness over the anxious hours of suffering and despondency. Beyond this, is the great public policy of preserving this important class of citizens for the commercial service...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Ameriquest Mortg. Co. v. Office of the Attorney Gen. of Wash.
-
Gibson v. Am. Constr. Co.
...maintenance and cure after a workplace injury—room, board, and medical expenses during recovery. Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska , Inc., 177 Wash.2d 399, 405-06, 300 P.3d 815 (2013). Injured seamen may also seek relief against a vessel owner alleging the vessel's unseaworthiness. Chandris , 5......
-
Barnes v. Sea Haw. Rafting, LLC
...standard. Accordingly, "[a] seaman's initial entitlement to maintenance and cure ... can properly be resolved on summary judgment," Dean , 300 P.3d at 822, as evidenced by the "numerous federal district courts" to have done so, id. at 821 (citing cases); see also Glynn v. Roy Al Boat Mgmt. ......
-
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. v. Swedish Health Services
... ... abdominal pain." When the ship docked in Juneau, Alaska, ... the ship doctor referred Almonte to Valley Medical Care. On ... by a vessel on navigable water. Jerome B. Grubart, Inc ... v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. , 513 U.S. 527, 534, ... 1333(1); [ 9 ] U.S. Const, art. Ill. § 2, cl. 1; ... Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska , 177 Wn.2d 399, 405, ... 300 P.3d 815 ... ...