Woldegiorgis v. NYK Ship Management

Background

Berekət Woldegiorgis brought a negligence claim against NYK Ship Management under section 905(b) of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. The dispute concerned whether a cargo vessel docked in Oakland had a duty to provide adequate lighting to longshoremen lashing cargo on the vessel’s deck.

NYK relied on safety standards and regulations, including the Pacific Coast Marine Safety Code and Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, to argue that the vessel had no such duty. Woldegiorgis relied on testimony from experienced longshoremen and a port employee stating that cargo vessels customarily provide lighting for longshoremen at West Coast ports. NYK acknowledged that, absent an agreement or custom to the contrary, a vessel has no duty to provide adequate lighting.

Court’s Analysis

Summary judgment is a decision entered without a trial when the evidence shows that no important factual dispute requires a jury’s decision. The court concluded that the evidence created a genuine dispute about whether the vessel had a duty to provide adequate lighting when Woldegiorgis requested it.

The court explained that custom may establish a duty under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. It also held that the testimony, safety standards, and regulations raised a factual question about whether NYK breached its duty of care. The court cited precedent stating that an Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation may be considered by a jury but does not necessarily require judgment for a shipowner.

Disposition

Because the dispute concerned an important fact, the court denied NYK Ship Management’s motion for summary judgment. The May 19, 2021 case-management order remained in place and governed further proceedings. Judge Alex G. Tse signed the order on August 5, 2021.