Bartel v. Alcoa Steamship Company, Inc.
3:14-cv-00326
M.D. La.Oct 2, 2014Background
- Plaintiff, William E. Bartel as personal representative of the Estate of Joseph Tague, filed March 12, 2014 in the 19th Judicial District Court in East Baton Rouge Parish alleging asbestos exposure on vessels owned or operated by Defendants, resulting in decedent’s lung cancer, under the Jones Act and general maritime law.
- Alcoa Steamship Company, Crowley Marine Services, Delta Steamship Lines, Waterman Steamship Corporation, and related entities were named defendants.
- Alcoa removed the case to federal court on May 23, 2014 invoking admiralty jurisdiction and removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
- Plaintiff moved to remand on June 16, 2014 arguing Jones Act claims are non-removable under §1445(a) and general maritime claims are non-removable under the saving to suitors clause of §1333.
- The Magistrate Judge recommended remanding the action to state court because the Jones Act claims are non-removable and the general maritime claims are not removable under §1441(c).
- The recommendation was issued against the backdrop of evolving Fifth Circuit authority on removability of general maritime claims post-2011 amendments to §1441.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jones Act claims are removable under §1445(a). | Bartel; Jones Act claims are non-removable. | Defendants; removal allowed under §1445(a) notwithstanding Jones Act. | Jones Act claims non-removable under §1445(a). |
| Whether §1441(c) allows removal of general maritime claims joined with Jones Act claims. | Bartel; general maritime claims are non-removable under saving to suitors. | Defendants; after 2011 amendments, general maritime claims may be removable. | §1441(c) does not permit removal here; no separate federal-question claim exists. |
| Whether the action is removable in its entirety under §1441(c) given lack of a federal-question claim. | Bartel; mixed claims allow removal in total with severance. | Defendants; not applicable absent independent federal-question claim. | Not removable in its entirety; severance/remand of Jones Act claims would be required if removability existed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 (1959) (maritime claims do not arise under federal question jurisdiction)
- Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19 (1990) (admiralty claims do not arise under 28 U.S.C. §1331)
- In re Dutile, 935 F.2d 61 (5th Cir. 1991) (admiralty claims do not fall within the category of claims arising under federal law)
- Pate v. Standard Dredging Corp., 193 F.2d 498 (5th Cir. 1952) (Jones Act negligence action incorporated FELA framework)
- Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U.S. 438 (2001) (§1445(a) precludes removal of Jones Act claims)
- Burchett v. Cargill, Inc., 48 F.3d 173 (5th Cir. 1995) (heavy burden to show Jones Act fraudulently pleaded)