Preview
1 Mark L. Venardi (SBN 173140)
Ryan Kraft (SBN 281407)
2 VENARDI ZURADA LLP
101 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 100
3
Walnut Creek, California 94596
4 Telephone: (925) 937-3900
Facsimile: (925) 937-3905
5 Email: rkraft@vzlawfirm.com
6
7 David Singelstad (SBN 148593)
1809 Hambrooks Boulevard
8 Cambridge, MD 21613
9 Tel: (510) 368-4888
Email: david.singelstad@gmail.com
10
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
KIRK CULLY
12
13
14 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
15 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
16
17 KIRK CULLY, Case No.
18 Plaintiff,
19 vs COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND
FOR JURY TRIAL
20 MATSON NAVIGATION CO.; SARGEANT
1. Negligence under Jones Act
21 MARINE, INC.; POINT SHIPPING CORP.; 2. Unseaworthiness
VULCAN CARRIERS, LTD., SHERIDAN
22 TRANSPORTATION; ATLANTIC 3. Maintenance Cure and Found
TANKSHIPS; and DOES 1 to 25
23
Defendants.
24
25
26 Plaintiff KIRK CULLY complains against Defendants as follows:
27 PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
28 1. Plaintiff Kirk Cully is a Delaware resident who suffers from a cancer of the blood
-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 known as multiple myeloma. Plaintiff developed the disease as a result of repeated exposure to
2 carcinogenic materials, including those containing benzene, while he worked on Defendants’
3 merchant ships.
4 2. The incidents giving rise to this toxic tort lawsuit occurred upon the navigable
5 waters of the United States. They are subject to admiralty tort jurisdiction because they had an
6 actual and potential impact on maritime commerce, involved a traditional maritime activity.
7 3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the causes of action in this
8 Complaint pursuant to the “Saving-to-Suitors” clause set forth in the Federal Judiciary Act of
9 1789, 28 U.S.C. 1333 (1).
10 4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
11 otherwise, of the Defendants named herein as DOES 1 through 25 are unknown to Plaintiff, who
12 therefore sues said Defendants under such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to
13 allege their true names and capacities when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed
14 and believes, and therefore alleges, that each of the fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in
15 some manner for the occurrences hereinafter alleged, and that said Defendants proximately caused
16 Plaintiff's damages as hereinafter set forth.
17 5. Defendants, including DOES 1 through 25, were or are corporations organized and
18 existing under the laws of one or more of the states of the United States, and were or are
19 authorized to do business and were or are doing business in California.
20 6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant MATSON NAVIGATION
21 COMPANY, INC. Defendant MATSON NAVIGATION COMPANY, INC. (hereafter
22 "MATSON") was doing business in the State of California and elsewhere at all times material
23 hereto.
24 7. Defendant MATSON is headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii.
25 8. Plaintiff worked for MATSON in the Port of Los Angeles in 2017 for 80 days as
26 "night mate", a temporary deck officer, on a number of MATSON ships tied up at docks loading
27 and unloading container cargoes. Doing this work, Plaintiff experienced hazardous, harmful
28 exposure to diesel engine exhaust containing a fraction of benzene.
-2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 9. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was present aboard Defendant POINT SHIPPING
2 CORP. vessel tank ship POINT JULIE and was acting in their service, in the course of his employment,
3 for at least 40 days during the calendar year 1982 as an ordinary seaman.
4 10. Defendant POINT SHIPPING CORP. owned, operated, maintained, and/or controlled
5 the tank ship POINT JULIE. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the POINT
6 JULIE, he regularly helped load and unload, and performed other tasks with liquid petroleum
7 cargoes containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at ports of the State of Florida, and other
8 ports and terminals the Eastern seaboard the United States.
9 11. Defendant VULCAN CARRIERS, LTD. owned, operated, maintained, and or
10 controlled the tank ship MV RANGER, on which plaintiff worked as an able-bodied seaman for at
11 least 57 days in the calendar year 1993.
12 12. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the MV RANGER, he
13 regularly helped load and unload petroleum cargoes, and performed other tasks with such cargoes,
14 all containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at marine terminals and ports of the State of
15 Louisiana, and elsewhere.
16 13. Defendant SHERIDAN TRANSPORTATION owned, operated, maintained, and
17 or controlled the tank ship integrated tug barge ITB JACKSONVILLE on which plaintiff worked as
18 an able-bodied seaman for at least 95 days in the calendar year 1993.
19 14. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the ITB JACKSONVILLE
20 he regularly helped load and unload petroleum cargoes, and performed other tasks with such
21 cargoes, all containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at marine ports of New York state,
22 and elsewhere on the United States Eastern seaboard. Defendant SHERIDAN TRANSPORTATION
23 main office is located at Brookwood, Alabama.
24 15. Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. was doing business in the State of Florida
25 and elsewhere at all times material hereto.
26 16. Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. is located in Boca Raton, Florida.
27 17. At all times, herein mentioned, Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. owned,
28 and or operated, maintained, and controlled vessels in navigation, which included, the vessel
-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 ASPHALT COMMANDER, on which Plaintiff served as an able bodied seaman for 122 days during
2 the calendar years 2001 and 2002. At all times material hereto, that vessel was afloat and operating
3 upon navigable waters.
4 18. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was present aboard the ASPHALT COMMANDER
5 acting in its service, in the course of his employment, while performing work tasks aboard that
6 ship, KIRK CULLY, and was exposed to cargoes containing significant amounts of benzene at
7 terminals and ports of Florida.
8 19. Defendant ATLANTIC TANKSHIPS owned, operated, maintained, and or
9 controlled the steam ship SEA VENTURE on which plaintiff worked for at least 48 days in 2003. In
10 the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the SEA VENTURE he served as an able bodied
11 seaman, where he was exposed to petroleum cargoes containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by
12 volume
13 20. PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES operated, maintained, and or controlled the
14 steam ship USNS GILLILAND on which plaintiff worked for at least 160 days in 2003 as a third
15 mate. He also served as a third mate for PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES aboard the USNS
16 BRITTIN for 89 days in 2004, and as third mate for 125 days in 2004-2005 as a third mate on the
17 USNS BOB HOPE. On these ships he had work duties that caused him to suffer frequent
18 unprotected exposure to vehicle engine exhausts exposure. PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES
19 offices are located in Concord, California.
20 21. HORIZON LINES, LLC. operated, maintained, and or controlled the steam ship
21 USNS HENSON T-AGS63 on which plaintiff worked for at least 40 days in 2006-2007 as a third
22 mate. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the USNS HENSON as a third mate, his
23 duties included work duties that caused him to suffer frequent unprotected exposure to vehicle
24 engine exhausts.
25 22. Plaintiff also served aboard the ship USNS BRUCE HEEZEN for 184 days in 2007. In the
26 course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the USNS BRUCE HEEZEN, he served as a third
27 mate. His duties on the USNS BRUCE HEEZEN included work duties that caused him to suffer frequent
28 unprotected exposure to vehicle engine exhausts.
-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligence under the Jones Act)
2
23. This Cause of Action arose under Section 33 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920,
3
4 46 U.S.C. § 30104, commonly known as “the Jones Act,” as appears more fully herein below.
5 24. At all times material hereto, Defendants and each of them employed Plaintiff as a
6 “seaman” within the meaning of the Jones Act and a “member of a crew” within the meaning of
7 the Longshore and Harbor Workers Act, 33 U.S.C. § 902(3)(G), in that (1) he had an
8 employment-related connection to the Defendants’ vessels and (2) he served aboard those vessels
9 in a capacity that contributed to their missions on the waters.
10 25. Throughout Plaintiff’s employments with Defendants, each of the Defendants,
11 acting through their officers, agents, and employees, were negligent in that, among other things:
12 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with a safe place to work aboard said vessels;
13 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with safe tools, equipment, facemasks, and
14 respirators, adequate supplies of respirator cartridges and canisters for respirators with which to
15 work aboard said vessels, and failed to require Plaintiff to wear respirators during his work, or
16 provide adequate training for their use;
17 • They failed to exercise reasonable care to determine whether Plaintiff's work aboard
18 their vessels regularly exposed him to cargoes, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids and
19 compounds containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume of the material;
20 • They failed to comply with the provisions of their own safety manuals;
21 • They failed to heed the warnings or comply with the instructions on the Material
22 Safety Data Sheets for the cargoes, fuels, solvents, and other consumables they use aboard their
23 vessels;
24 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with any medical monitoring;
25 • They failed to notify Plaintiff that his work exposed him to cargoes, fuels, solvents,
26 and other workplace liquids and compounds containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume;
27 and
28 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with proper training and work procedures.
-5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 26. As a direct, proximate, and legal result of the hereinabove alleged delicts of
2 Defendants and each of them, Plaintiff contracted a blood disorder myelodysplastic syndrome
3 from the toxic, carcinogenic cargoes, fuels, compounds, solvents, vapors, and gasses to which he
4 was exposed in the course of his hereinabove alleged employment as a seaman. Myelodysplastic
5 syndrome (hereinafter "MDS") is an insidious, internal disorder, which has a long latency period,
6 does not manifest itself externally or immediately, and cannot ordinarily be detected by unassisted
7 nonprofessionals. Plaintiff did not, and could not through reasonable care and diligence, discover
8 this disorder until after July 2021 when a physician diagnosed this disease and affliction. Plaintiff
9 did not, and could not through reasonable care and diligence, discover that this affliction was
10 caused by his hereinabove alleged exposure to liquids, vapors, and materials containing benzene.
11 27. During Plaintiff's chemotherapy treatment for MM, he suffered a severe and
12 disabling stroke, which caused him to suffer severe loss of speech, normal communication, and
13 spoken and written comprehension. These injuries may be permanent, or marginally recoverable,
14 and are chargeable to Defendants.
15 28. As a further direct and proximate result of the herein above-alleged delicts of
16 Defendants, and each of them, and of the afflictions caused thereby, Plaintiff experienced, and
17 will continue to experience, great physical, nervous, mental, psychological, and emotional pain
18 and suffering, all to his general damage, in an amount that exceeds the jurisdictional limits of the
19 Superior Court.
20 29. As a further direct and proximate result of the hereinabove alleged delicts of
21 Defendants, and each of them, and of the afflictions caused thereby, Plaintiff was forced to incur,
22 and will continue to be forced to incur, various medical, surgical, hospital, pharmaceutical, and
23 therapeutic costs and expenses, all to his special damage in an amount to be determined at the
24 time of trial herein.
25 30. As a further direct and proximate result of the delicts of Defendants, and each of
26 them, and of the injuries caused thereby, Plaintiff has lost, and will continue to lose, wages,
27 earnings, earning capacity, income, and “found” or room and board at sea, all to his further special
28 damage in an amount to be determined at the time of trial.
-6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Unseaworthiness)
2
31. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations into this cause of action.
3
32. This Cause of Action arises under the General Maritime Law of the United States,
4
as hereinafter more fully appears.
5
33. At all times herein mentioned Plaintiff was acting in the service of the vessels
6
identified in this Complaint hereinabove and performed duties of the type traditionally performed
7
by seamen.
8
34. At the times and places herein mentioned, by provision of the General Maritime
9
Law of the United States, Defendants, and each of them, warranted to Plaintiff that the vessels
10
identified in Paragraphs 9-29, and their decks, cargoes, consumables, equipment, personal
11
protective gear, tackle, apparel, machinery, fuels, solvents, crews, training, and procedures were
12
safe, seaworthy, and reasonably fit for their intended use.
13
35. Said Defendants, and each of them, acting through their officers, agents, and
14
employees, breached the previously mentioned warranty in that, among other things:
15
• The cargoes, fuels, solvents, and other consumables to which said Defendants
16
exposed Plaintiff aboard said vessels contained dangerous levels of benzene, a known carcinogen;
17
• Said vessels were not equipped with the venting systems, respirators, and personal
18
protective equipment that Plaintiff and his fellow crew members needed to work safely with or
19
around benzene-containing liquids and materials and the vapors from such liquids and compounds;
20
• There were no medical procedures in place for monitoring Plaintiff and his fellow
21
crewmembers aboard those vessels for benzene exposure;
22
• There were no work procedures in place aboard those vessels for determining
23
whether Plaintiff and his fellow crew members were performing shipboard tasks or working in
24
shipboard spaces that exposed them to cargoes, vapors, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids
25
and materials containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume; and
26
• There were no work procedures in place aboard those vessels for notifying Plaintiff
27
and his fellow crewmembers that they were performing shipboard tasks or working in shipboard
28
-7-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 spaces that exposed them to cargoes, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids and materials
2 containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume.
3
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
4 (Maintenance, Cure and Found)
5 36. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations into this cause of action.
6 37. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff was unable to resume his hereinabove alleged
7 employment, and therefore was, and still is, entitled to immediate reimbursement for maintenance,
8 found, care, and cure for the duration of said disability.
9 38. Defendants, and each of them, failed and refused to furnish Plaintiff with the
10 maintenance, found, care, and cure due him and thereby forced him to hire a lawyer and file this
11 lawsuit.
12
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
13
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
14
• For general damages in excess of the jurisdictional limits of the Superior Court;
15
• For special damages according to proof;
16
• For maintenance, cure, and found;
17
• For attorneys’ fees under Vaughan v. Atkinson, 369 U.S. 527 (1962);
18
• For costs of suit herein;
19
• For prejudgment interest; and,
20
• For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
21
22
Dated: 12/13/2023
23
24
25
____________________________
26
MARK VENARDI
27 DAVID SINGELSTAD
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
28 KIRK CULLY
-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1
2
JURY DEMAND
3
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
4
5
Dated: 12/13/2023
6
7
8
____________________________
9 MARK VENARDI
10 DAVID SINGELSTAD
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
11 KIRK CULLY
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Preview
1 Mark L. Venardi (SBN 173140) Ryan Kraft (SBN 281407) 2 VENARDI ZURADA LLP 101 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 100 3 Walnut Creek, California 94596 4 Telephone: (925) 937-3900 Facsimile: (925) 937-3905 5 Email: rkraft@vzlawfirm.com 6 7 David Singelstad (SBN 148593) 1809 Hambrooks Boulevard 8 Cambridge, MD 21613 9 Tel: (510) 368-4888 Email: david.singelstad@gmail.com 10 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff KIRK CULLY 12 13 14 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 15 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 16 17 KIRK CULLY, Case No. 18 Plaintiff, 19 vs COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 20 MATSON NAVIGATION CO.; SARGEANT 1. Negligence under Jones Act 21 MARINE, INC.; POINT SHIPPING CORP.; 2. Unseaworthiness VULCAN CARRIERS, LTD., SHERIDAN 22 TRANSPORTATION; ATLANTIC 3. Maintenance Cure and Found TANKSHIPS; and DOES 1 to 25 23 Defendants. 24 25 26 Plaintiff KIRK CULLY complains against Defendants as follows: 27 PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 28 1. Plaintiff Kirk Cully is a Delaware resident who suffers from a cancer of the blood -1- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 known as multiple myeloma. Plaintiff developed the disease as a result of repeated exposure to 2 carcinogenic materials, including those containing benzene, while he worked on Defendants’ 3 merchant ships. 4 2. The incidents giving rise to this toxic tort lawsuit occurred upon the navigable 5 waters of the United States. They are subject to admiralty tort jurisdiction because they had an 6 actual and potential impact on maritime commerce, involved a traditional maritime activity. 7 3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the causes of action in this 8 Complaint pursuant to the “Saving-to-Suitors” clause set forth in the Federal Judiciary Act of 9 1789, 28 U.S.C. 1333 (1). 10 4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or 11 otherwise, of the Defendants named herein as DOES 1 through 25 are unknown to Plaintiff, who 12 therefore sues said Defendants under such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to 13 allege their true names and capacities when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed 14 and believes, and therefore alleges, that each of the fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in 15 some manner for the occurrences hereinafter alleged, and that said Defendants proximately caused 16 Plaintiff's damages as hereinafter set forth. 17 5. Defendants, including DOES 1 through 25, were or are corporations organized and 18 existing under the laws of one or more of the states of the United States, and were or are 19 authorized to do business and were or are doing business in California. 20 6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant MATSON NAVIGATION 21 COMPANY, INC. Defendant MATSON NAVIGATION COMPANY, INC. (hereafter 22 "MATSON") was doing business in the State of California and elsewhere at all times material 23 hereto. 24 7. Defendant MATSON is headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii. 25 8. Plaintiff worked for MATSON in the Port of Los Angeles in 2017 for 80 days as 26 "night mate", a temporary deck officer, on a number of MATSON ships tied up at docks loading 27 and unloading container cargoes. Doing this work, Plaintiff experienced hazardous, harmful 28 exposure to diesel engine exhaust containing a fraction of benzene. -2- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 9. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was present aboard Defendant POINT SHIPPING 2 CORP. vessel tank ship POINT JULIE and was acting in their service, in the course of his employment, 3 for at least 40 days during the calendar year 1982 as an ordinary seaman. 4 10. Defendant POINT SHIPPING CORP. owned, operated, maintained, and/or controlled 5 the tank ship POINT JULIE. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the POINT 6 JULIE, he regularly helped load and unload, and performed other tasks with liquid petroleum 7 cargoes containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at ports of the State of Florida, and other 8 ports and terminals the Eastern seaboard the United States. 9 11. Defendant VULCAN CARRIERS, LTD. owned, operated, maintained, and or 10 controlled the tank ship MV RANGER, on which plaintiff worked as an able-bodied seaman for at 11 least 57 days in the calendar year 1993. 12 12. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the MV RANGER, he 13 regularly helped load and unload petroleum cargoes, and performed other tasks with such cargoes, 14 all containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at marine terminals and ports of the State of 15 Louisiana, and elsewhere. 16 13. Defendant SHERIDAN TRANSPORTATION owned, operated, maintained, and 17 or controlled the tank ship integrated tug barge ITB JACKSONVILLE on which plaintiff worked as 18 an able-bodied seaman for at least 95 days in the calendar year 1993. 19 14. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the ITB JACKSONVILLE 20 he regularly helped load and unload petroleum cargoes, and performed other tasks with such 21 cargoes, all containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume at marine ports of New York state, 22 and elsewhere on the United States Eastern seaboard. Defendant SHERIDAN TRANSPORTATION 23 main office is located at Brookwood, Alabama. 24 15. Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. was doing business in the State of Florida 25 and elsewhere at all times material hereto. 26 16. Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. is located in Boca Raton, Florida. 27 17. At all times, herein mentioned, Defendant SARGEANT MARINE, INC. owned, 28 and or operated, maintained, and controlled vessels in navigation, which included, the vessel -3- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 ASPHALT COMMANDER, on which Plaintiff served as an able bodied seaman for 122 days during 2 the calendar years 2001 and 2002. At all times material hereto, that vessel was afloat and operating 3 upon navigable waters. 4 18. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was present aboard the ASPHALT COMMANDER 5 acting in its service, in the course of his employment, while performing work tasks aboard that 6 ship, KIRK CULLY, and was exposed to cargoes containing significant amounts of benzene at 7 terminals and ports of Florida. 8 19. Defendant ATLANTIC TANKSHIPS owned, operated, maintained, and or 9 controlled the steam ship SEA VENTURE on which plaintiff worked for at least 48 days in 2003. In 10 the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the SEA VENTURE he served as an able bodied 11 seaman, where he was exposed to petroleum cargoes containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by 12 volume 13 20. PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES operated, maintained, and or controlled the 14 steam ship USNS GILLILAND on which plaintiff worked for at least 160 days in 2003 as a third 15 mate. He also served as a third mate for PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES aboard the USNS 16 BRITTIN for 89 days in 2004, and as third mate for 125 days in 2004-2005 as a third mate on the 17 USNS BOB HOPE. On these ships he had work duties that caused him to suffer frequent 18 unprotected exposure to vehicle engine exhausts exposure. PATRIOT CONTRACT SERVICES 19 offices are located in Concord, California. 20 21. HORIZON LINES, LLC. operated, maintained, and or controlled the steam ship 21 USNS HENSON T-AGS63 on which plaintiff worked for at least 40 days in 2006-2007 as a third 22 mate. In the course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the USNS HENSON as a third mate, his 23 duties included work duties that caused him to suffer frequent unprotected exposure to vehicle 24 engine exhausts. 25 22. Plaintiff also served aboard the ship USNS BRUCE HEEZEN for 184 days in 2007. In the 26 course of Plaintiff's aforesaid employment aboard the USNS BRUCE HEEZEN, he served as a third 27 mate. His duties on the USNS BRUCE HEEZEN included work duties that caused him to suffer frequent 28 unprotected exposure to vehicle engine exhausts. -4- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Negligence under the Jones Act) 2 23. This Cause of Action arose under Section 33 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, 3 4 46 U.S.C. § 30104, commonly known as “the Jones Act,” as appears more fully herein below. 5 24. At all times material hereto, Defendants and each of them employed Plaintiff as a 6 “seaman” within the meaning of the Jones Act and a “member of a crew” within the meaning of 7 the Longshore and Harbor Workers Act, 33 U.S.C. § 902(3)(G), in that (1) he had an 8 employment-related connection to the Defendants’ vessels and (2) he served aboard those vessels 9 in a capacity that contributed to their missions on the waters. 10 25. Throughout Plaintiff’s employments with Defendants, each of the Defendants, 11 acting through their officers, agents, and employees, were negligent in that, among other things: 12 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with a safe place to work aboard said vessels; 13 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with safe tools, equipment, facemasks, and 14 respirators, adequate supplies of respirator cartridges and canisters for respirators with which to 15 work aboard said vessels, and failed to require Plaintiff to wear respirators during his work, or 16 provide adequate training for their use; 17 • They failed to exercise reasonable care to determine whether Plaintiff's work aboard 18 their vessels regularly exposed him to cargoes, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids and 19 compounds containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume of the material; 20 • They failed to comply with the provisions of their own safety manuals; 21 • They failed to heed the warnings or comply with the instructions on the Material 22 Safety Data Sheets for the cargoes, fuels, solvents, and other consumables they use aboard their 23 vessels; 24 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with any medical monitoring; 25 • They failed to notify Plaintiff that his work exposed him to cargoes, fuels, solvents, 26 and other workplace liquids and compounds containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume; 27 and 28 • They failed to provide Plaintiff with proper training and work procedures. -5- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 26. As a direct, proximate, and legal result of the hereinabove alleged delicts of 2 Defendants and each of them, Plaintiff contracted a blood disorder myelodysplastic syndrome 3 from the toxic, carcinogenic cargoes, fuels, compounds, solvents, vapors, and gasses to which he 4 was exposed in the course of his hereinabove alleged employment as a seaman. Myelodysplastic 5 syndrome (hereinafter "MDS") is an insidious, internal disorder, which has a long latency period, 6 does not manifest itself externally or immediately, and cannot ordinarily be detected by unassisted 7 nonprofessionals. Plaintiff did not, and could not through reasonable care and diligence, discover 8 this disorder until after July 2021 when a physician diagnosed this disease and affliction. Plaintiff 9 did not, and could not through reasonable care and diligence, discover that this affliction was 10 caused by his hereinabove alleged exposure to liquids, vapors, and materials containing benzene. 11 27. During Plaintiff's chemotherapy treatment for MM, he suffered a severe and 12 disabling stroke, which caused him to suffer severe loss of speech, normal communication, and 13 spoken and written comprehension. These injuries may be permanent, or marginally recoverable, 14 and are chargeable to Defendants. 15 28. As a further direct and proximate result of the herein above-alleged delicts of 16 Defendants, and each of them, and of the afflictions caused thereby, Plaintiff experienced, and 17 will continue to experience, great physical, nervous, mental, psychological, and emotional pain 18 and suffering, all to his general damage, in an amount that exceeds the jurisdictional limits of the 19 Superior Court. 20 29. As a further direct and proximate result of the hereinabove alleged delicts of 21 Defendants, and each of them, and of the afflictions caused thereby, Plaintiff was forced to incur, 22 and will continue to be forced to incur, various medical, surgical, hospital, pharmaceutical, and 23 therapeutic costs and expenses, all to his special damage in an amount to be determined at the 24 time of trial herein. 25 30. As a further direct and proximate result of the delicts of Defendants, and each of 26 them, and of the injuries caused thereby, Plaintiff has lost, and will continue to lose, wages, 27 earnings, earning capacity, income, and “found” or room and board at sea, all to his further special 28 damage in an amount to be determined at the time of trial. -6- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Unseaworthiness) 2 31. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations into this cause of action. 3 32. This Cause of Action arises under the General Maritime Law of the United States, 4 as hereinafter more fully appears. 5 33. At all times herein mentioned Plaintiff was acting in the service of the vessels 6 identified in this Complaint hereinabove and performed duties of the type traditionally performed 7 by seamen. 8 34. At the times and places herein mentioned, by provision of the General Maritime 9 Law of the United States, Defendants, and each of them, warranted to Plaintiff that the vessels 10 identified in Paragraphs 9-29, and their decks, cargoes, consumables, equipment, personal 11 protective gear, tackle, apparel, machinery, fuels, solvents, crews, training, and procedures were 12 safe, seaworthy, and reasonably fit for their intended use. 13 35. Said Defendants, and each of them, acting through their officers, agents, and 14 employees, breached the previously mentioned warranty in that, among other things: 15 • The cargoes, fuels, solvents, and other consumables to which said Defendants 16 exposed Plaintiff aboard said vessels contained dangerous levels of benzene, a known carcinogen; 17 • Said vessels were not equipped with the venting systems, respirators, and personal 18 protective equipment that Plaintiff and his fellow crew members needed to work safely with or 19 around benzene-containing liquids and materials and the vapors from such liquids and compounds; 20 • There were no medical procedures in place for monitoring Plaintiff and his fellow 21 crewmembers aboard those vessels for benzene exposure; 22 • There were no work procedures in place aboard those vessels for determining 23 whether Plaintiff and his fellow crew members were performing shipboard tasks or working in 24 shipboard spaces that exposed them to cargoes, vapors, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids 25 and materials containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume; and 26 • There were no work procedures in place aboard those vessels for notifying Plaintiff 27 and his fellow crewmembers that they were performing shipboard tasks or working in shipboard 28 -7- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 spaces that exposed them to cargoes, fuels, solvents, or other workplace liquids and materials 2 containing more than 0.1 percent benzene by volume. 3 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 4 (Maintenance, Cure and Found) 5 36. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations into this cause of action. 6 37. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff was unable to resume his hereinabove alleged 7 employment, and therefore was, and still is, entitled to immediate reimbursement for maintenance, 8 found, care, and cure for the duration of said disability. 9 38. Defendants, and each of them, failed and refused to furnish Plaintiff with the 10 maintenance, found, care, and cure due him and thereby forced him to hire a lawyer and file this 11 lawsuit. 12 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 13 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows: 14 • For general damages in excess of the jurisdictional limits of the Superior Court; 15 • For special damages according to proof; 16 • For maintenance, cure, and found; 17 • For attorneys’ fees under Vaughan v. Atkinson, 369 U.S. 527 (1962); 18 • For costs of suit herein; 19 • For prejudgment interest; and, 20 • For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 21 22 Dated: 12/13/2023 23 24 25 ____________________________ 26 MARK VENARDI 27 DAVID SINGELSTAD Attorneys for the Plaintiff 28 KIRK CULLY -8- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 2 JURY DEMAND 3 Plaintiff demands a trial by jury. 4 5 Dated: 12/13/2023 6 7 8 ____________________________ 9 MARK VENARDI 10 DAVID SINGELSTAD Attorneys for the Plaintiff 11 KIRK CULLY 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -9- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL