Monthly Archives: March 2022

Local 2 (KPRC-TV) interviewed attorney Mike Doyle of Doyle Dennis Avery LLP about the oil spill that occurred on Monday, March 24, 2014. in the Port of Houston.

According to the report, the accident happened when the Miss Susan, a tow vessel, collided with a barge that was carrying 924,000 gallons of fuel oil. The Miss Susan was moving from Texas City to the Bolivar peninsula when the collision occurred. The US Coast Guard believes that at least 160,000 gallons of the fuel oil spilled into the Houston Ship Channel. The six crewmembers aboard the Miss Susan have been accounted for, though two were sent to the hospital for hydrogen sulfide exposure.

Both ships were owned by Kirby Inland Marine. Investigators are currently trying to figure out exactly what happened to cause the tow vessel and the barge to collide. Data collection is key, according to Mr. Doyle. “Depending on how they’re equipped… there may be black box information that you could look at. There’s also radar information. The port has its own systems for monitoring vessels in the port, and they’ll try to grab that data, as well as interviewing people involved.”

This is not the first time the Miss Susan has been involved in an incident. She had been involved in two other collisions and 11 incidents in the past. It is unknown whether the same captain in these incidents was piloting the Miss Susan at the time of the wreck. Investigators are also looking into the possibility of weather-related circumstances, as there was fog in the channel at the time of the wreck.

Cleanup crews are already at work to sop up the oil, but it is clear that this is a major spill that will require extensive investigation and a long court battle. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP has experience in maritime accident law, and has fought companies like Kirby Inland Marine and others in the past to compensate workers for their injuries. If you have been injured while working on a vessel, give our offices a call for a free consultation.

A federal judge on Friday ordered seizure of the cargo ship that collided with a fuel barge causing the oil spill in Galveston Bay.

On March 22, the Summer Wind was en route to the Port of Houston when it collided with a barge owned by Kirby Inland Marine. The barge was being towed by the tugboat Miss Susan and was headed from the Port of Texas City to the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW).

Spanning 3,000 miles (4,800 km), the ICW provides a preferred shipping route consisting of channels, lagoons, rivers and man-made canals along the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Navigating heavy commercial traffic amidst narrow pathways forces vessels to often maneuver in close proximity with obstructed vision. Any form of negligence can easily cause accidents in these situations.

The vessels collided where the Texas City channel and ICW intersect. The collision resulted in the spill of more than 168,000 gallons (4,000 barrels) of heavy fuel oil into the bay.

Every mile of the ICW is governed by the Inland Navigation Laws but the legal framework is far more complex as Federal admiralty and maritime law overlap with state law and special inland area laws. Though the investigation regarding fault in the Houston wreckage is still ongoing, under federal law, Kirby Inland Marine is designated as the responsible party since the spilled oil came from its barge.

If you or someone you know has been involved in an offshore accident, finding a maritime lawyer who is experienced in these legal complexities is paramount. Contact the law office of Doyle where we have extensive experience with offshore and ICW injuries.

– Via Galveston County The Daily News

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP has filed a general maritime lawsuit against Edison Chouest Offshore (“Edison Chouest”) and Chevron USA, Inc. (“Chevron”), after our client suffered an electrocution while at work.  Suit is filed under the Longshore and Harbor Worker’s Compensation Act, a federal workers’ compensation program that covers injuries which take place in areas adjacent to navigable waterways for workers engaged in maritime employments.

As an employee of PMI Environmental, the plaintiff was cleaning the tank of a vessel owned by Edison Chouest and operated by Chevron while the vessel was at a dock on navigable waters of the United States. During this particular instance of tank maintenance, the lights in the tank went out. With a light in one hand, plaintiff reached and triggered a relay button which immediately sent 110 volts of electricity through his body, causing serious and debilitating pains. Immediately, our client’s right arm went numb and doctors note signs of continuing neuropathic issues.

The acts and omissions of Edison Chouest and Chevron constitute negligence and negligence per se by them failing to act in a reasonably prudent manner after the catastrophe. Gross negligence also took place as the corporations, acting through employees, agents, and representatives, recklessly and dangerously failed to carry out the safety obligations which would have prevented our client’s impairment and possible future disfigurement.

As is normal in such injurious situations, our client also suffered a loss of earning capacity and endures extensive medical expenses, both past and future.

If you or someone you love has suffered injury on or near a vessel and believe the claim involves the Longshore Act, Jones Act, or another possible area of maritime law, contact the admiralty attorneys of Doyle. Our firm has the incomparable experience, qualification, and reputation needed to strive for the largest recovery possible for your loss.

The Jones Act is an extremely important law for anyone who works on the sea. It allows people who work as seamen and are injured on the job to have a trial by jury to sue for damages. It’s very similar to the same rights that railroad workers have. However, not everyone that works on the sea is classified as a seaman by the law.

According to a Supreme Court decision in 1995, a worker has to be out on the sea more than 30% of the time to be classified as a seaman. This means that many people who work on the docks and face many of the same dangers do not get the benefits of the Jones Act.

This issue may be taken up again by the Supreme Court soon. In 2008, a worker sued his employer after getting silicosis from sandblasting vessels. The fine sand got into his lungs and caused him to lose his job. His employer claimed that he didn’t qualify for Jones Act protections since he spent most of his time on the docks. In 2012, the worker died and his widow is now trying to take the case to the Supreme Court.

The worker did spend time out on the sea. When he wasn’t doing dock duties, he was taking pilots out to commercial vessels so local pilots could drive the boats out of Chesapeake Bay. The question is whether his boat maintenance work counts as being out on the sea.

Courts around the country are split about whether dock work counts as being out on the sea for the purposes of the Jones Act. The justices are scheduled to discuss whether to take the case or not. Resolving this issue in favor of the workers could open many companies to lawsuits.