John Crane, Inc. v. Hardick
722 S.E.2d 610
Va.2012Background
- Hardick, a Navy sailor, sued JCI and others for asbestos exposure under general maritime law seeking $20M in compensatory damages and $5M in punitive damages; Hardick died before trial and the case was revived as a wrongful death action by his executrix Mrs. Hardick.
- Hardick worked on multiple ships as shipfitter and machinery repairman; he was exposed to asbestos in valves and gaskets he handled.
- Trial evidence showed exposure aboard ships both in territorial waters and on the high seas; some duties occurred underway at sea, others in port.
- JCI moved to exclude nonpecuniary damages and argued Hardick was a seaman or alternatively a nonseafarer; the trial court admitted nonpecuniary damages.
- Jury apportioned 50% fault to JCI and 50% to Garlock, awarding nonpecuniary damages for pain and suffering and loss of society; JCI moved for new trial/remittitur, which were denied.
- The appellate court held disallowance of nonpecuniary damages for a seaman under general maritime law; remanded to adjust final judgment accordingly.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether nonpecuniary damages are recoverable for a seaman’s wrongful death | Hardick was a nonseafarer; damages should include nonpecuniary losses under general maritime law | Seaman status limits damages to pecuniary losses and DOHSA applies | Nonpecuniary damages not recoverable; seaman damages limited to pecuniary losses. |
| Whether gasket-removal evidence was admissible and properly linked to JCI | Evidence showed gasket removal by Hardick; connections to JCI evidence. | Need direct tying to JCI products; testimonial links insufficient | JCI waived argument on gasket-removal evidence; trial court’s ruling sustained. |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in excluding Hewitt’s testimony | Hewitt’s Navy knowledge could be relevant to exposure. | Testimony was speculative and not tied to Hardick’s ships | No abuse of discretion; Hewitt’s testimony excluded as irrelevant. |
| Whether Miles and related Supreme Court precedent require disallowing nonpecuniary damages for seaman wrongful death across DOHSA/Jones Act/general maritime law | Uniform approach should permit nonpecuniary damages | Statutes control damages; Miles supports pecuniary damages only | Miles supports uniform rule disallowing nonpecuniary damages for seaman wrongful death. |
Key Cases Cited
- McDermott Int'l, Inc. v. Wilander, 498 U.S. 337 (1991) (defines seaman status; duties must contribute to vessel’s function)
- Yamaha Motor Corp. v. Calhoun, 516 U.S. 199 (1996) (nonseafarer category and territorial vs high seas distinctions)
- Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19 (1991) (no recovery for loss of society in general maritime wrongful death of a seaman)
- Higginbotham v. Gaudet, 436 U.S. 618 (1978) (uniformity; Gaudet’s territorial waters damages; high seas DOHSA framework)
- Gaudet v. Sea-Land Servs., 414 U.S. 573 (1974) (loss of society damages; territorial waters preference for Gaudet approach)
- Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375 (1970) (created general maritime wrongful-death remedy; uniform federal approach)
- Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis, 515 U.S. 347 (1995) (seaman status requires connection to vessel in navigation; duration and nature)
- The Harrisburg, 119 U.S. 199 (1886) (admiralty wrongful death remedy initially absent; state/federal statutes later)
- Michigan Central R.R. Co. v. Vreeland, 227 U.S. 59 (1913) (pecuniary loss damages in FELA-derived contexts)