Charles Dise v. Express Marine, Incorporated, 476 F. App'x 514

Dise, a Maryland resident, worked as an assistant engineer for EMI on the Tug BALTIMORE starting Oct 2003.
EMI purchased a 14-foot skiff for draft readings, which after July 19, 2005, was also used to transport groceries and supplies.
On July 19, 2005, Dise and Greggs took draft readings, then drove the skiff down Three Mile Creek toward a moored ship, allegedly at Greggs’s or Dise’s request.
Dise allegedly accelerated at full throttle after an emergency call, collided with a bridge bulkhead, and sustained severe leg injuries; Greggs survived with injuries.
Dise received medical treatment at USA Medical, EMI paid his medical costs, then Dise later required extensive treatment in Baltimore; result was permanent leg injuries and no return to EMI work.
District court granted EMI summary judgment on five counts; EMI’s counterclaim for skiff damage was later resolved in EMI’s favor; Dise appeals.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jones Act negligence element standard	Dise contends EMI breached duty foreseeably causing injury.	EMI argues no breach; no genuine dispute of material fact.	Affirmed EMI on Jones Act negligence.
Unseaworthiness causation burden	Dise asserts defective skiff/crew caused injury.	No genuine fact dispute; unseaworthiness not shown as proximate cause.	Affirmed district court; no unseaworthy condition established.
Vicarious liability for negligent medical care	EMI liable under Jones Act for medical treatment negligent provider.	No affirmative act by EMI selecting USA Medical; no agency relationship.	Affirmed district court; no vicarious liability due to lack of affirmative act.
EMI counterclaim for damage to skiff	Counterclaim barred by Jones Act/FELA principles.	Counterclaim allowed; not a liability-exempting device under FELA.	Affirmed district court’s grant of summary judgment for EMI on counterclaim.

Kernan v. American Dredging Co., 355 U.S. 426 (Supreme Court 1958) (Jones Act/FELA framework and causation principles)
Hernandez v. Trawler Miss Vertie Mae, 187 F.3d 423 (4th Cir. 1999) (Jones Act elements; liberal construction; causation standard)
O’Donnell v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., 318 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court 1943) (duty extending from vessel to shore)
Sinkler v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., 356 U.S. 326 (Supreme Court 1958) (agency within FELA for others performing under contract)
Hopson v. Texaco, Inc., 383 U.S. 262 (Supreme Court 1966) (agency concept in Jones Act maintenance and cure context)
De Zon v. American President Lines, 318 U.S. 660 (Supreme Court 1943) (maintenance and cure non-delegable duty)
Fitzgerald v. A.L. Burbank & Co., 451 F.2d 670 (2d Cir. 1971) (shipowner liable for negligent physician it selects)
Sambula v. Central Gulf S.S. Corp., 405 F.2d 291 (5th Cir. 1968) (onshore physician; shipowner liability)
Olsen v. American Steamship Co., 176 F.3d 891 (6th Cir. 1999) (on-shore physician treated crew; vicarious liability)
Cavanaugh v. W. Md. Ry. Co., 729 F.2d 289 (4th Cir. 1984) (FELA counterclaims and liability concepts)
Withhart v. Otto Candies, L.L.C., 431 F.3d 840 (5th Cir. 2005) (employer counterclaims in Jones Act context)
Deering v. Nat’l Maint. & Repair, Inc., 673 F.3d 1039 (7th Cir. 2010) (property damage counterclaims in maritime context)