Admiralty And Maritime Law

Federal maritime law governs legal disputes, such as navigation and shipping, including commerce, seamen, personal injury, towage, insurance, liens, and recreation. Federal maritime law, also known as admiralty law, also covers awards for salvaging vessels, piracy or ship hijacking.

Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides that cases involving maritime law are to be heard in federal courts. A plaintiff, however, pursuant to 28 USC ยง1333 may choose to file a suit in state court, but federal law will still apply in that case. Courts and the Congress seek to create a uniform law that will govern both national and international maritime issues. Current federal maritime law is composed of modern legislation, case precedents, maritime doctrines, international treaties and private contracts.

Maritime law only governs legal disputes originating on navigable waters, which include all bodies of water used for interstate and foreign commerce. This means any body of water, such as a lake or a river, within a single state is not covered by maritime law.

In the area of shipping, admiralty law applies to such issues as commercial accidents resulting in damage to vessels and cargo, injuries to seamen, and spill of hazardous material. Following an accident, litigation would arise to determine who is responsible for the lost or damaged cargo. In cases of foreign trade, the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act ("COGSA") governs. COGSA provides that a ship owner's liability is limited to $500 per container provided that the ship was in proper condition prior to departure.

One of the most complex issue that arises from maritime law cases is compensation for personal injury to passengers and seamen. This issue involves expertise of maritime law specialists. In recent years, maritime law has been increasingly applied to recreational boating accidents that occur on navigable waters. In the case of passengers of cruise ships, their legal rights arising from the negligence of the cruise ship is limited by the terms of their ticket. This means that the statute of limitations for filing a suit would be only one year, instead of three, and that notice of filing of such suit may be required in as little as six months.

Recovering compensation for personal injury is even more complicated for "seamen," defined by Jones Act as a crew member whose responsibilities meets certain requirements under the same Act. The Act governs the rights of seamen to recover personal injury compensation. The determination alone of who a "seaman" often requires consultation with a lawyer. Following the determination of whether Jones Act applies, seamen are entitled to jury trial to provide them a fair process for filing negligence claims. Should the negligent act of the employer results to the death of the seaman, the surviving family members are allowed to file suit. Moreover, personal injury litigation also delves on insurance law, adding another complex layer to the litigation and needing the expertise of specialists.

If employees do not fit the definition of "seamen" under Jones Act, they may recover compensation for personal injury under other laws, such as the Doctrine of Unseaworthiness or the law of "maintenance and cure."

Areas of Law

Discrimination Law - Legal Information and Resources

Discrimination

Employment discrimination is punishable by law based on the humanistic theory that all beings are created equal and must be afforded equal rights and equal protection of the law. Employment discrimination in the United States stems from issues relating to age, disability, ethnicity, race, religion, sex, and in recent years, gender. The U.S. Constitution, through the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment prohibits federal and state governments to discriminate. While the U.S. Constitution does not extend to private businesses, a growing number of cases through the years had the U.S. Supreme Court interpreting the anti-discriminatory provisions as applicable to both the public and private sectors.

Discriminatory practices relating to employment are prohibited by both federal and state statutes. Discriminatory practices include bias in hiring, promotion, compensation and termination. Discriminatory practices also include sexual harassment. Equal protection right requires state and federal governments to treat employees, former employees, and job applicants equally, regardless of sex, race or religion. One of the most common issues arising from violation of the equal protection clause would be refusing women or members of the LGBT community the same promotion opportunities or the same pay afforded to male workers, or refusing married homosexual couples the same employment benefits afforded to married heterosexual couples. Moreover, women have also been historically victims of discriminatory employment practices that numerous nationwide class actions have been spawned as a result of these practices.

Under the right to due process, employers are required to give employees a fair process especially when there is investigation involving an employee or in cases of termination. One of the common cases arising from employers' violation of the right to due process would be terminating an employee because the employee exercised his or her right to form or join a union. In addition, there are several cases of employees who were laid off because they sued their employer.

When found to have suffered from discrimination, an employee may seek redress for damages against the employer. Under the U.S. Code, employees are guaranteed the right to a jury trial for cases seeking compensatory and punitive damages arising from discriminatory practices. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 also prohibits discriminatory practices by employers who have businesses in two or more states. While state and federal statutes are specific as what consists discriminatory practices, proving its existence is not easy and would require an attorney specializing in these matters. Filing a claim or a suit has to go through a tedious process that would often involve a review by a government agency and a race against statute of limitations. On top of that, the employee, being the plaintiff, also has to shoulder the cost in procuring evidence of the alleged discriminatory practices.

It is not easy for an employee, especially if acting alone, to battle an employer as the employer typically has a bevy of lawyers on stand-by to argue that the employment practice is not discriminatory and is in accordance with the law. Add to this another huge difficulty when that employer is a major corporation, whose power is not just limited to its business industry, but also extends to all three branches of the government.

Areas of Law