In January 2005, plaintiff Douglas O’Neill, 25, worked for SeaRiver Maritime in Qutar on a ship called the S/R Mediterranean, performing tank gauging tests. One day while he was measuring the level of crude oil in a tank, he was exposed to high levels of hydrogen sulfide, a highly toxic chemical. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide can lead to respiratory problems, headaches, neurological difficulties and cognitive deficiencies.O’Neill sued SeaRiver Maritime and S/R Meditterranean, claiming negligence under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness.
O’Neill claimed that his employer did not provide him with any safety equipment to protect him from the hydrogen sulfide, and failed to properly supervise the crew and train employees. Also, plaintiff alleged, the defendants concealed the nature and extent of the hazards of exposure to hydrogen sulfide. O’Neill alleged that after the exposure, he reported health problems to his captain but received inadequate treatment. The captain failed to mention in his report on the incident that O’Neill was exposed to hydrogen sulfide, but he did tell onshore medical staff about the exposure two weeks after it happened.
Defense counsel argued that there was no proof that O’Neill was exposed to a high level of hydrogen sulfide. On the contrary, the defense maintained, O’Neill was wearing a sealed self-contained breathing apparatus while testing, and the testing took only 15 minutes, during which time the level of hydrogen sulfide level was low, according to monitor readings.
A bench trial was conducted.
O’Neill claimed that exposure to hydrogen sulfide caused damage to his brain, lungs, heart and eyesight. He also suffered from memory problems and severe headaches. He began treating with a toxicologist two weeks after the exposure, but alleged that he continued to experience breathing problems, headaches and memory loss despite the treatment. He was also treated by neurologists, who found that he suffered from severe cognitive deficits. He alleged that he could no longer work, exercise or physically exert himself after the exposure. He sought damages for past and future medical expenses.
He also sought damages for past and future lost earnings, alleging that he was making $47,000 per year at the time of the accident and had a work life expectancy of 35.1 years.
O’Neill also sought damages for past pain and suffering.
Plaintiff’s counsel reported that the amounts he asked the jury to award in the various categories of damages were in the same range as the amounts ultimately awarded by the judge.
Defense counsel maintained that there was no proof that hydrogen sulfide exposure caused O’Neill’s injuries and that doctors failed to eliminate other possible causes of O’Neill’s alleged neurological difficulties.
Judge Samuel Kent found the defendants 80% at fault and O’Neill 20%, stating that he should have been more proactive in his medical care. O’Neill’s gross damages were determined to be $800,000, of which amount he netted $600,000.