Maritime employers hire a wide range of workers who come from all over the world and have different immigration statuses. Employees may be citizens, permanent residents, or in the country on a temporary work visa. Some workers may not currently have legal status.

Foreign seamen injured on U.S. flagged vessels or vessels operating extensively out of U.S. ports are too often dissuaded from pursuing an action in U.S. courts. However, in many situations, the foreign seaman would be protected under the Jones Act and U.S. maritime law.

The U.S. Supreme Court has articulated a two-prong test to determine seaman status under the Jones Act:

  • An employee’s duties must contribute to the function of the vessel or the accomplishment of its mission
  • A seaman must have a connection to a vessel in navigation that is substantial in terms of both its duration and its nature.

Noticeably absent in this test is any requirement of U.S. citizenship or residency. As the Second Circuit described in Kyriakos v. Goulandris, “when Congress used the word ‘seamen’ in the Jones Act it employed a word of general application, embracing men of any nation who sail the seas. Had it wished to limit the application of the statute to seamen of American citizenship or residence, the words to effectuate the limitation were at hand.”

Despite its irrelevancy for seaman status under the Jones Act, injured foreign seamen bringing suit in U.S. courts are still often subject to motions by defendant vessel owners for dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds, which is a discretionary power that allows U.S. courts to dismiss a case when the plaintiff’s chosen forum would impose a heavy burden on the defendant or the court, and an adequate alternative forum is available (such as in the foreign plaintiff’s country of citizenship). The first step in determining whether an action should be dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds is to determine whether United States law should be applied to the case.

Whether United States or foreign law should apply to a maritime injury case is governed by the Supreme Court trilogy of Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571 (1953); Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 (1959); and Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306 (1970). Under these cases, the following eight factors determine the choice of law:

  • The allegiance or domicile of the plaintiff
  • The place of the contract
  • The allegiance of the defendant shipowner
  • The law of the flag
  • The accessibility of the foreign forum
  • The place of the wrongful act
  • The law of the forum
  • The defendant shipowner’s base of operations

The above factors are not of equal, or even comparable, significance. Generally, the law of the flag and the defendant shipowner’s base of operations weigh most heavily in the determination. In Lauritzen, the Supreme Court described the law of the flag as of “cardinal importance” in determining applicable law. In Rhoditis, the Supreme Court held that the defendant’s New York base of operations favored U.S. law despite the ship’s Greek flag. On the other hand, the place of the alleged wrongful act, the inaccessibility of a foreign forum, and the law of the forum are seldom relevant to the choice of law analysis.

While the vessel’s flag is often of “cardinal importance,” the fact that U.S. shipowners often forum shop and register their vessels outside of the United States must also be considered. As the Supreme Court in Rhoditis explained, “the façade of the operation must be considered as minor, compared with the real nature of the operation and a cold objective look at the actual operational contacts that this ship and this owner have with the United States.”

In sum, when the subject vessel flies the U.S. flag or operates extensively out of the United States, there is often a strong basis for asserting that U.S. law applies and that a U.S. court should retain jurisdiction, whether the seaman is a U.S. citizen or a citizen of another nation. Despite limited exceptions to the restriction on recovery by non-U.S. citizens and non-resident aliens for incidents in waters outside of the U.S., foreign seamen injured on U.S. flagged vessels or vessels operating out of U.S. ports, in many instances, have the same rights under U.S. maritime law as an U.S. citizen and should often consider pursuing an action in a U.S. court.

Most importantly, foreign seamen and their families should not be dissuaded against filing suit in the United States without first consulting with an experienced maritime attorney.

Washington, Oregon, California, and Alaska Maritime Lawyers for Any Immigration Status

If you are a maritime worker who has been injured on the job, an experienced maritime lawyer at Anderson Carey Williams & Neidzwski, LLP can represent you, regardless of your immigration status. While we do not practice immigration law, we are well-versed in representing all types of people in their recovery efforts for maritime injuries. Call us today at 1-800-262-8529 to schedule a free consultation.

We represent clients throughout the Pacific Northwest, including federal and state courts in Washington, California, Alaska, and Oregon.

If you have any questions about your right to file a lawsuit or the consequences a lawsuit might have, talk to a skilled maritime injury lawyer before you make any decisions. Contact us today at 1 (800) 262-8529 to schedule a free consultation.

Back to Top

Overview of Maritime Injury Law and Immigration

Back to Top

Maritime Injuries for Permanent Residents and Those With Temporary Visas

Legal permanent residents have most of the same rights and privileges as U.S. citizens. This includes the right to file a lawsuit if injured at the workplace. A person who is a lawful permanent resident is a person who possesses a “green card.” You may be a permanent resident if you possess any of these visas:

  • IR
  • F1
  • F2A
  • F2B
  • F3
  • EB-1
  • EB-2
  • EB-3
  • EB-4
  • EB-5
  • Diversity (DV)
  • Political Asylum
  • Refugee

A person with a temporary worker visa or nonimmigrant visa has a permit to work in the United States for a certain period of time. Types of temporary visas include:

  • H-1B
  • H-1B1
  • H-2A
  • H-2B
  • H-3
  • L

If you are in the United States on a nonimmigrant visa based on employment, you may be concerned that if you file suit, you will lose your job and your legal status. However, it is illegal for an employer to retaliate against an employee who files a lawsuit for an injury incurred on the job. If you are in the United States on a temporary worker visa, you have a right to file suit should you suffer injury on the job.

Back to Top

Lawsuits for Maritime Workers Without Legal Immigration Status

If you entered the country without legal permission; you had a visa, but it has expired; or you had a visa for something other than work, then you do not have legal status to work in the United States. However, that does not mean you do not have rights.

If you are in the United States as an undocumented immigrant, you still have the right to file a lawsuit and recover if you were injured on the job due to the negligence or wrongful acts of your employer or the vessel owner.

You may be concerned that filing suit will trigger removal actions. There is no guarantee that you will not be deported after filing a lawsuit. However, a University of Illinois study over a ten-year period found that few courts acted on immigration matters when the plaintiff did not have legal status. If you have questions, your best strategy is to discuss these matters with an experienced attorney.

Back to Top

BOATLAW, LLP | Maritime Attorneys for Oregon, Washington, California, and Alaska Immigrants

At BOATLAW, LLP, we are here to serve maritime workers injured on the job, regardless of their immigration status. If you have any questions about your right to file a lawsuit or the consequences a lawsuit might have, talk to a skilled maritime injury lawyer before you make any decisions. Contact us today at 1-800-262-8529 to schedule a free consultation.