Opinion ID: 1149136
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: whether the court had authority to grant summary judgement on whether thompson was seaman?

Text: ¶ 5. Thompson contends that the circuit court improperly granted summary judgement because whether an employee is a seaman is an issue of fact for a jury to determine. Thompson is partially correct in her assertion. However, seaman status may be decided on summary judgment where the evidence does not support a finding, as a matter of law, that the claimant is permanently assigned to a Jones Act vessel. Pavone v. Mississippi Riverboat Amusement Corp., 52 F.3d 560, 565 (5th Cir.1995) ( quoting Gremillion v. Gulf Coast Catering Co., 904 F.2d 290, 292 (5th Cir.1990)). And where undisputed facts reveal that a maritime worker has a clearly inadequate temporal connection to vessels in navigation, the court may take the question from the jury by granting summary judgment or a directed verdict. Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis, 515 U.S. 347, 371, 115 S.Ct. 2172, 2191, 132 L.Ed.2d 314 (1995) (citation omitted). The facts were undisputed here and the trial court properly granted summary judgment finding Thompson was not a seaman.