Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workers Compensation And Maritime topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel: worker's compensation mariner cases may require counsel in both states
Summary
A Missoula caller with an Alaska workman's-compensation and maritime claim was told on the air that local attorneys can assemble medical records and work with Alaska counsel, but jurisdictional and maritime (Jones Act) issues may require coordinated representation.
Missoula — A Missoula caller who said her workman's compensation and maritime claims originated in Alaska was advised on the Dial-A-Lawyer program that handling such a case often requires a local attorney to compile records and a correspondent attorney licensed in the other state.
The caller described a multi-year case and said a local firm turned the matter over to its Seattle branch, which then told her she needed an attorney in Alaska. She said the suit “has to be filed before the 31 this month” and that she was told to find counsel “before the June 1.”
Jim O’Brien and Ralph Kerscher both suggested finding a local attorney who could collect medical and vocational evidence and, if necessary, work with a specialist in maritime law. A caller on the program identified the federal Jones Act when discussing maritime claims and said an attorney “doesn't have to be a specialist in work comp because the work comp laws of Alaska are gonna apply.” O’Brien said callers should try local listings and the lawyer referral service and “plugging” until they find counsel. Kerscher noted he was “not aware of a specialist in Montana who has expertise in maritime law.”
Panelists emphasized practical next steps rather than legal conclusions on jurisdiction: gather medical records, contact local attorneys who list relevant specialties, and ask whether the firm will coordinate with an Alaska correspondent counsel. The on-air comments were guidance only; no attorney on the program undertook representation during the broadcast.
This was discussion only; callers raised an imminent filing deadline and sought referrals; no formal legal action occurred on air.
