In the Matter of the Complaint of WITTICH BROS. MARINE, INC. v. Estate of Donald Maloney, 2:15-cv-05210

Wittich Bros. Marine, owner of the tug Sea Bear, filed a limitation of liability action after the Sea Bear sank on March 14, 2015; four crew abandoned ship and crewman Donald Maloney drowned.
Maloney's daughter Corrine was the sole immediate beneficiary and was appointed personal representative of his estate on June 15, 2015, but Corrine died in a car accident on September 3, 2015, before suing.
Maloney's ex-wife, Carolyn Badke, later received authority as personal representative/administrator for both Corrine's estate (Letters of Limited Administration) and Maloney's estate, and filed a claim in intervention asserting Jones Act negligence and general maritime unseaworthiness claims.
Wittich moved for judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), arguing the Jones Act claims cannot be pursued by Badke and that Jones Act beneficiary limitations preempt general maritime claims.
The court applied the Rule 12(b)(6)/12(c) plausibility standard and considered statutory vesting and maritime wrongful-death jurisprudence to decide which claims survive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jones Act claims may be brought by Badke on behalf of Corrine's estate after Corrine's death	Badke contends she can pursue Corrine's vested Jones Act causes of action as Corrine's personal representative	Wittich contends any Jones Act cause of action vested exclusively in Corrine at Maloney's death and abated when Corrine died; Badke cannot revive it	Court: Jones Act claims vested immediately in Corrine and abated upon her death; Badke cannot bring them — dismissed with prejudice
Whether general maritime-law wrongful-death / unseaworthiness claims are barred by the Jones Act beneficiary scheme	Badke asserts she may pursue unseaworthiness claims under general maritime law as personal representative for Maloney and/or Corrine's estate	Wittich argues the Jones Act beneficiary limitations should preempt or limit who may bring general maritime wrongful-death claims	Court: Jones Act limitations do not preclude general maritime unseaworthiness wrongful-death claims; Badke may pursue the general maritime claim — motion denied as to that claim

Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Wells-Dickey Trust Co., 275 U.S. 161 (1927) (statutory beneficiary scheme creates exclusive, alternative vesting)
Lindgren v. United States, 281 U.S. 38 (1930) (Jones Act precluded recovery under state wrongful-death statutes for seamen for unseaworthiness)
Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp., 379 U.S. 148 (1964) (interpreting beneficiary scheme and preclusive effects)
Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375 (1970) (recognizing a general maritime wrongful-death cause of action)
Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19 (1990) (holding there is a general maritime wrongful-death action for seamen alongside Jones Act remedies)