October Term 2000 · Docket 99-1331

Can a shipowner limit liability to defeat a seaman's Jones Act claim?

A seaman seeks full damages under the Jones Act. The shipowner argues the Limited Liability Act caps those damages.

Official caption
Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Roy Dripps argued both statutes should apply.

    He claimed the company used the Limited Liability Act improperly.

    He stated this action destroys rights Congress granted to Lewis.

    Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the oral argument session.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

James Lewis sued Lewis & Clark Marine for injuries. He claims the Jones Act grants him specific rights. The company argues the Limited Liability Act restricts its financial exposure. The Court must decide if these statutes conflict.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 29, 2000.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Lewis wants full compensation under the Jones Act.

Lewis & Clark Marine wants a liability cap under the Limited Liability Act.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Lewis argues the Jones Act grants specific seaman rights.

Lewis & Clark Marine argues the Limited Liability Act caps damages.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

How do the Jones Act and Limited Liability Act interact?

Does the Limited Liability Act override Jones Act rights?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the financial exposure of shipowners. It determines the compensation available to injured seamen. It clarifies the scope of federal maritime liability laws.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON