Semien v. Parker Drilling Offshore Corp

Plaintiff: Kirby Semien
Defendant: Parker Drilling Offshore Corp
Case Number: 6:2014cv01087
Filed: June 3, 2014
Court: Louisiana Western District Court
Office: Lafayette Office
County: Evangeline
Presiding Judge: Rebecca F Doherty
Referring Judge: Patrick J Hanna
Nature of Suit: Marine
Cause of Action: 46:0688
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
April 5, 2016 48 Opinion or Order of the Court TRIAL RULING On the basis of the foregoing evidence and testimony, the Court finds Mr. Semien is entitled to general damages in the amount of $200,000. Total Gross Damages Award: In light of the evidence, testimony, and considerations described above, the Court awards recovery in the following amounts: Past lost wages:$122,548.00Minus Advances:-$24,614.48Total past lost wages:$ 97,933.52Future lost wages:$288,337.00Total Lost Wages:$386,270.52 Employer-provi ded meals: $ 40,100.00Employer contributions to insurances:$ 52,658.00Total Fringe Benefits:$ 92,758.00Past medical expenses: $ 1,525.12Future medical expenses: $ 0.00Total Medical Expenses:$ 1,525.12Required vocational rehabilitation:$ 5,000.00Household Services:$ 34,651.00Total Specific Damages:$520,204.64General Damages:$200,000.00Total Damages:$720,204.64This Court having found Mr. Semien fifty (50) percent a t fault, therefore, reduces his award by fifty (50) percent. Thus, the total amount awarded to Mr. Semien for Parker Drillings negligence is: Total Damages Awarded: $360,102.32I.InterestThe Court and the parties agree an award of prejudgment in terest is within the discretion of the trial court when a Jones Act case is brought under the courts admiralty jurisdiction (and the case is tried to the court and not to the jury), even if there is not a finding of unseaworthiness. Williams v. Read ing & Bates Drilling Co., 750 F.2d 487, 491 (5th Cir. 1985). This Court, however, in the exercise of its discretion does not award prejudgment interest in this case, noting that Parker Driller paid advances to Mr. Semien, up to maximum medical improv ement granting Mr. Semien use of that money during that period, and that Mr. Semien admitted making no effort of any nature to even attempt to engage in any educational activity of any kind, or to attempt to find any work of any kind. For these and the other reasons included above, this Court declines to order pre-judgment interest. The parties are ORDERED to present a judgment agreed to as to form reflecting the ruling of the Court within ten days of receipt of this ruling. Signed by Judge Rebecca F Doherty on 4/5/16. (crt,Guidry, C)
January 28, 2016 32 Opinion or Order of the Court AMENDED MEMORANDUM RULING re 29 Memorandum Ruling.. Signed by Judge Rebecca F Doherty on 1/28/16. (crt,Guidry, C)
January 25, 2016 29 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM RULING Parker Drilling's Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief 24 is GRANTED. re 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Parker Drilling Offshore U S A L L C. IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment Seeki ng Dismissal of Certain Claims for Damages, Maintenance and Cure 16 filed by Parker Drilling Offshore Corporation ("Parker") is DENIED. this Court concluding there are genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the plaintiff was solely liable for his injuries or whether Parker Drilling bears some liability for the plaintiffs' damages. Signed by Judge Rebecca F Doherty on 1/25/16. (crt,Guidry, C)
January 8, 2016 26 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM RULING - For the following reasons the 17 MOTION for Summary Judgment Seeking Dismissal of Certain Claims for Damages, Maintenance, and Cure filed by Parker Drilling Offshore U S A L L C is GRANTED in its entirety, in the fo llowing particulars: 1. Summary dismissal of that portion of plaintiffs Jones Act claim seeking damages for depression and insomnia, only, is appropriate and that aspect of Parker Drillings motion as to the Jones Act and damages for insomnia and depr ession is GRANTED. To the extent that other claims for damages are alleged under the Jones Act, such claims are not impacted by this Ruling. 2. Summary dismissal of that portion of plaintiffs maintenance and cure claim as to the depression and insom nia, only, is GRANTED. To the extent that other maintenance and cure claims are alleged, such claims are not impacted by this Ruling. The parties shall clarify whether any maintenance and cure claims remain in this matter. 3. Summary dismissal of t hat portion of plaintiffs unseaworthiness claim for damages for depression and insomnia, only, also must flow. To the extent that other claims for damages related to plaintiffs unseaworthiness claim are alleged, such claims are not impacted by this Ruling. Signed by Judge Rebecca F Doherty on 1/8/16. (crt,Guidry, C)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Louisiana Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Semien v. Parker Drilling Offshore Corp
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Parker Drilling Offshore Corp
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kirby Semien
Represented By: James P Ryan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?