Practice Areas

Blog

Library

Maintenance and Cure Resolved In Favor of Seaman

Maintenance and Cure-- all doubts are resolved in favor of employee

If a seaman has sustained an injury or illness while in the service of a vessel, his employer has a duty to provide him with “maintenance and cure” benefits. A Jones Act employer must pay an injured employee maintenance and cure regardless of whether the injury resulted from the seaman’s own negligent acts, and the employer must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the seaman receives the proper treatment and care he deserves.

“Maintenance” constitutes payments made by a Jones Act employer in order to cover an injured employee’s expenses on land (room and board, monthly bills, etc.). Maintenance is designed to compensate injured seamen for expenses that would normally be covered by their employer while at sea. “Cure” is defined as payment of reasonable medical expenses during the employee’s time of recovery. An injured employee is entitled to receive these benefits until his condition reaches “maximum cure” (i.e. until he is found fit for duty or placed at maximum medical improvement by his physician).

The law states that if any ambiguities or doubts exist concerning an employee’s entitlement to maintenance and cure, they are to be resolved in favor of the injured seaman. For example, in Vaughan v. Atkinson, the plaintiff seaman checked into a hospital for suspected tuberculosis 5 days after returning home from a voyage. After being treated and discharged from the hospital, the plaintiff sought maintenance and cure from his employer and forwarded his medical records to the employer indicating a strong possibility of active tuberculosis. The employer made only minimal inquiries into the validity of the plaintiff’s claim, and did not respond to the plaintiff’s request for maintenance and cure benefits. In addressing the issue of ambiguity over whether the seaman contracted the disease while in the service of the employer’s vessel, the Supreme Court stated that “... the shipowner's liability for maintenance and cure [is] among the most pervasive of all and [is] not to be defeated by restrictive distinctions nor narrowly confined. When there are ambiguities or doubts, they are resolved in favor of the seaman.” Although there may have been some uncertainty as to whether the plaintiff contracted tuberculosis before returning to port, the court gave deference to the welfare of the seaman and awarded maintenance and cure benefits accordingly. [click here to read case]

Contact the Louisiana Maritime Lawyers at The Young Firm if you have any questions at all regarding your rights! We have been helping injured Louisiana Jones Act and maritime workers for years. Your case is about more than your injury; your case is about your future.