398 U.S. 306, 90 S. Ct. 1731, 26 L. Ed. 2d 252, 1970 A.M.C. 994 (1970)
A Greek seaman was injured aboard the vessel Hellenic Hero while the ship was docked in the Port of New Orleans.1 He filed suit under the Jones Act against Hellenic Lines Ltd., a Greek corporation, and Universal Cargo Carriers Inc., a Panamanian corporation that owns the vessel but has it managed by Hellenic Lines Ltd.2
Hellenic Lines Ltd. maintains its largest office in New York and another office in New Orleans.3 More than 95 percent of the stock of both corporations is owned by Pericles G. Callimanopoulos, a Greek citizen who became a lawful permanent resident alien of the United States in 1952, has lived in Connecticut since 1945, and manages the corporations from New York.4 The Hellenic Hero operates on regularly scheduled runs between United States ports and ports in the Middle East, Pakistan, and India, generating its entire income from cargo that either originates or terminates in the United States.5
The seaman, a Greek citizen, signed articles in Greece.6 His employment contract specifies that Greek law and a Greek collective-bargaining agreement govern the relationship and that all claims arising from the contract must be adjudicated in Greek courts.7
The District Court, sitting without a jury, rendered judgment for the seaman.8 The Court of Appeals affirmed.9 The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari because the decision below conflicted with a ruling of the Second Circuit in Tsakonites v. Transpacific Carriers Corp.10
Whether the Jones Act applies to a Greek seaman injured aboard a Greek-flag vessel in a United States port when the vessel's owner is a Greek corporation whose base of operations is in the United States?11
The Jones Act applies to a foreign seaman on a foreign-flag vessel when the shipowner has substantial and continuing contacts with the United States.12 Courts determine applicability by weighing the Lauritzen factors together with the shipowner's base of operations and other indicia of an American-based operation.13
Yes. The established facts demonstrate that Hellenic Lines Ltd. maintains its largest office in New York and another office in New Orleans.14 More than 95 percent of its stock is owned by Pericles, who has lived in Connecticut since 1945 and manages the corporation from New York.15 The Hellenic Hero generates its entire income from cargo originating or terminating in the United States.16 These contacts establish that the owner conducts an extensive business operation in this country.17 The injury occurred in the Port of New Orleans.18 The forum is a United States court, and Pericles became a lawful permanent resident alien in 1952.19
These elements outweigh the Greek flag, the Greek nationality of the seaman, and the Greek employment contract specifying Greek courts.20
The Jones Act applies to the seaman's claim against the shipowner.21
Related opinions on this issue
Justice Harlan dissented on the ground that the Jones Act does not reach a Greek seaman who signed articles in Greece for employment on a Greek-owned Greek-flag vessel, even when the vessel enters American waters.22 He maintained that the law of the flag governs shipboard transactions absent a clear expression of congressional intent to the contrary.23 The plaintiff's lack of American ties means Greek law supplies the appropriate rule.24
Harlan rejected reliance on the owner's base of operations or competitive-advantage rationales.25 Contacts such as beneficial ownership serve only as a jurisdictional nexus and do not determine whether congressional policy is furthered when the seaman has no connection to the United States.26
Whether the shipowner's base of operations constitutes a relevant factor in determining whether the Jones Act covers a foreign seaman on a foreign-flag vessel?27
Yes. The court expressly approved the view that the shipowner's base of operations is another factor of importance.30 Pericles manages the corporation out of New York.31 The Hellenic Hero and its sister ships earn income from cargo originating or terminating in the United States.32
The operation is not a casual visitor but an integrated business with its largest office in New York.33 These operational contacts are weighed against the formal factors of flag, seaman nationality, and contract to determine whether the Jones Act reaches the claim.34
The shipowner's base of operations is a relevant factor in the Jones Act analysis.35
Related opinions on this issue
Justice Harlan contended that the base of operations and similar contacts have no bearing on whether Jones Act recovery is appropriate for a plaintiff with no American ties.36 He argued that Lauritzen focused the inquiry on whether congressional purpose is furthered by applying the statute and on the plaintiff's relationship to the United States.37 The inquiry does not turn on the defendant's commercial contacts or the convenience of foreign registry.38
In his view, once the plaintiff is a foreign national residing abroad, the law of the flag and the contractual choice of Greek law control regardless of where the owner maintains offices or earns income.39