Opinion ID: 698692
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: General Maritime Claim for Negligence

Text: 19 Plaintiffs argue that they can pursue a general maritime law claim against ContiCarriers for negligence. Assuming Plaintiffs have standing to pursue this claim, both the Fifth and the Ninth Circuits follow a well-established principle of land-based tort law that [a]n employee cannot recover for injuries received while doing an act to eliminate the cause of the injury. Peters v. Titan Navigation Co., 857 F.2d 1342, 1345 (9th Cir.1988) (internal quotations, citations and footnote omitted). This principle precludes Plaintiffs' claim against ContiCarriers. 20 In any event, Plaintiffs have not introduced any evidence that ContiCarriers' negligence caused Olson's death. The record indicates that the very nature of the barge towage business requires barges to be repaired regularly. Appellees' App. at 75. ContiCarriers hired Dakota to repair the barge rails on which the covers slide. There is no evidence in the record that this repair was required as a result of ContiCarriers' negligence; in fact, the record states that this type of repair is routine. Appellees' App. at 34. A necessary first step in this repair is the removal of the barge covers. Accordingly, we do not believe that Plaintiffs introduced sufficient evidence to support their theory that ContiCarriers' negligence caused Olson's death. We affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of ContiCarriers on this claim as well.