Back to Recreational Boating Accidents
Back to Maritime Attorney Homepage
Back to Kayaking & Canoeing Resources
Back to Maritime Litigation - Maritime Arbitration
Back to Maritime Attorney Homepage
Back to Kayaking & Canoeing Resources
Back to Maritime Litigation - Maritime Arbitration
In a recreational boating accident, many legal issues will arise. Liability, or fault, will be a
major issue. Which boat operator is to blame for the accident? Another issue is
insurance coverage. Is there marine insurance, and if there is, does it cover the injury or
injuries of the accident victims. Surprisingly, marine insurance is not mandatory. See
Basics of Marine Insurance, from the August 2005 Boaters Digest.
But what about smaller vessels where the equipment is not sophisticated, or where
reliable logs are not kept? Gathering evidence may require detailed investigation and
reconstruction of events. Which sailboat was on the starboard tack…and which way
was the wind blowing? Did a genoa jib hide a sailboat’s port running light from an
approaching vessel? Was that sportfisherman ahead of or abaft your starboard beam?
Sure, these elements can be speculated by studying the location of damages on the
vessels…and examining the way shrouds snapped, or fiberglass splintered. But it’s not
like a car accident where one car was going north, another east…and they collide at a
red light, with a traffic camera catching the moment of impact in a high resolution image.
Just as a good investigation will include physical evidence, it must include testimonial
evidence. This will require interviewing the operators, passengers, or eyewitnesses on
shore. This can be done through a deposition, where the witnesses answer questions
verbally under oath…or interrogatories, where a witness provides written answers to a
list of questions. A good maritime attorney must know what questions to ask and how to
ask them. A good maritime attorney should also know what to do with the answers.
Witnesses can forget details, or they might not have been in a good vantage point to
view a collision. It should be remembered that witnesses may want to protect family
members, or protect the owner of the boat they were aboard.
Another form of testimonial evidence can come from an expert witness. This can be a
former captain or naval architect who takes the stand to assert that it is likelier than not
that a collision or a capsizing occurred in a certain manner, based upon physical
evidence, passenger testimony, stability characteristics of the vessels, sea conditions,
etc. Such an expert witness will generally have credentials that demonstrate to the
court that he or she is in a position to offer such a conclusion. A good maritime lawyer
should understand enough about commercial and recreational vessels to question such
conclusions if necessary. A good maritime trial attorney should recognize when the
adversary's expert testimony is technically defensible…and when it is not.
Another important issue in a recreational boating accident is whether or not an accident
will be subject to admiralty jurisdiction, thus opening the door to maritime law. If a
pleasure boat accident occurred on navigable waters and the accident had the potential
to disrupt maritime commerce, and the vessels were engaged in traditional maritime
activity, admiralty jurisdiction applies. Traditional maritime activity doesn’t necessarily
mean dredging a harbor or commanding a containership. It can include recreational
boating. If maritime law applies, then the door is opened to maritime law concepts.
These include certain presumptions of law, limitation of liability, comparative liability,
marine liens, marine salvage, among other elements unique to maritime law. To learn
more about some of these, go to Maritime Law and Sailing, from Windcheck magazine,
or go to Defeating Limitation of Liability in Maritime Law, from Trial, the magazine of the
Association of Trial Lawyers of America.
Tim Akpinar Contact Information:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Street
Address:
Mailing
Address:
Website:
© 2006 by Tim Akpinar - All Rights Reserved
The contents of this website may not be copied or transmitted without the
prior written consent of Tim Akpinar
major issue. Which boat operator is to blame for the accident? Another issue is
insurance coverage. Is there marine insurance, and if there is, does it cover the injury or
injuries of the accident victims. Surprisingly, marine insurance is not mandatory. See
Basics of Marine Insurance, from the August 2005 Boaters Digest.
But what about smaller vessels where the equipment is not sophisticated, or where
reliable logs are not kept? Gathering evidence may require detailed investigation and
reconstruction of events. Which sailboat was on the starboard tack…and which way
was the wind blowing? Did a genoa jib hide a sailboat’s port running light from an
approaching vessel? Was that sportfisherman ahead of or abaft your starboard beam?
Sure, these elements can be speculated by studying the location of damages on the
vessels…and examining the way shrouds snapped, or fiberglass splintered. But it’s not
like a car accident where one car was going north, another east…and they collide at a
red light, with a traffic camera catching the moment of impact in a high resolution image.
Just as a good investigation will include physical evidence, it must include testimonial
evidence. This will require interviewing the operators, passengers, or eyewitnesses on
shore. This can be done through a deposition, where the witnesses answer questions
verbally under oath…or interrogatories, where a witness provides written answers to a
list of questions. A good maritime attorney must know what questions to ask and how to
ask them. A good maritime attorney should also know what to do with the answers.
Witnesses can forget details, or they might not have been in a good vantage point to
view a collision. It should be remembered that witnesses may want to protect family
members, or protect the owner of the boat they were aboard.
Another form of testimonial evidence can come from an expert witness. This can be a
former captain or naval architect who takes the stand to assert that it is likelier than not
that a collision or a capsizing occurred in a certain manner, based upon physical
evidence, passenger testimony, stability characteristics of the vessels, sea conditions,
etc. Such an expert witness will generally have credentials that demonstrate to the
court that he or she is in a position to offer such a conclusion. A good maritime lawyer
should understand enough about commercial and recreational vessels to question such
conclusions if necessary. A good maritime trial attorney should recognize when the
adversary's expert testimony is technically defensible…and when it is not.
Another important issue in a recreational boating accident is whether or not an accident
will be subject to admiralty jurisdiction, thus opening the door to maritime law. If a
pleasure boat accident occurred on navigable waters and the accident had the potential
to disrupt maritime commerce, and the vessels were engaged in traditional maritime
activity, admiralty jurisdiction applies. Traditional maritime activity doesn’t necessarily
mean dredging a harbor or commanding a containership. It can include recreational
boating. If maritime law applies, then the door is opened to maritime law concepts.
These include certain presumptions of law, limitation of liability, comparative liability,
marine liens, marine salvage, among other elements unique to maritime law. To learn
more about some of these, go to Maritime Law and Sailing, from Windcheck magazine,
or go to Defeating Limitation of Liability in Maritime Law, from Trial, the magazine of the
Association of Trial Lawyers of America.
Tim Akpinar Contact Information:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Street
Address:
Mailing
Address:
Website:
© 2006 by Tim Akpinar - All Rights Reserved
The contents of this website may not be copied or transmitted without the
prior written consent of Tim Akpinar
| A maritime trial lawyer representing a boating accident injury victim, or injured seamen, should be alert to improper questions an opposing attorney might use during direct or cross examination. A good maritime trial lawyer should aggressively defend the injured boater or seamen from an opposing lawyer's improper questions. Here are some examples. A leading question is one that tries to trick the injury victim into answering something the adversary lawyer wants confirmed. For instance, "Is it true or not that you were operating your vessel at excessive speed in the no-wake zone?" Another type of improper question that a good marine lawyer should challenge is the misleading question. For instance, "Are you still totally lost with grasping the concept of red right return?" Questions that are argumentative in nature should also be challenged. "Why did you cut off the other vessel?" Compound questions should also be objected to. An example would be a string of questions rolled into one that is confusing. "Why did you increase speed and when would you say was the point at which you first spotted the other vessel?" Conclusionary questions are ones that require the witness form an opinion they aren't suited to make. "Was the captain reacting to withdrawl from his anti-depressants?" These are just a few exceptions. You can see the entire list of objections, including the Hearsay Rule under the Federal Rules of Evidence. |
(718) 224-9824
t.akpinar@verizon.net
250-02 Northern Blvd - Suite 200
Little Neck, New York 11363
P.O. Box 620766
Little Neck, New York 11362
www.mycounsel.us
t.akpinar@verizon.net
250-02 Northern Blvd - Suite 200
Little Neck, New York 11363
P.O. Box 620766
Little Neck, New York 11362
www.mycounsel.us
| Boating Accident Legal Issues New York Boating Accident Attorney - Boating Accident Legal Information - Boating Accident Legal Resources |
Going back to liability…there may not
be a completely blameless operator.
Evidence could indicate negligence
on the part of both vessels. Maritime
law recognizes this reality by
applying comparative liability. This
means the blame for a boating
accident could be shared by both
operators, in a manner determined by
a court.
The thing about boating accident
liability…you need evidence to prove
it. Sometimes the evidence will be
obvious, like a boat hitting a crowded
gas dock in attempting a downwind
landing. But sometimes the evidence
won’t be obvious. Boats don’t leave
skid marks. Ascertaining the final
headings of two boats prior to a
collision can be difficult. Larger
vessels have electronic navigation
equipment from which navigational
data could be retrieved. Commercial
vessels are moving towards use of
black boxes, which have long been
used aboard aircraft.
be a completely blameless operator.
Evidence could indicate negligence
on the part of both vessels. Maritime
law recognizes this reality by
applying comparative liability. This
means the blame for a boating
accident could be shared by both
operators, in a manner determined by
a court.
The thing about boating accident
liability…you need evidence to prove
it. Sometimes the evidence will be
obvious, like a boat hitting a crowded
gas dock in attempting a downwind
landing. But sometimes the evidence
won’t be obvious. Boats don’t leave
skid marks. Ascertaining the final
headings of two boats prior to a
collision can be difficult. Larger
vessels have electronic navigation
equipment from which navigational
data could be retrieved. Commercial
vessels are moving towards use of
black boxes, which have long been
used aboard aircraft.
| The swearing in of a witness. A good maritime trial attorney should know how to ferret the truth out of a well coached witness...the one who can act like a boy scout and lie while respectfully ending every sentence with, "Your Honor" and "Yes, Ma'am" |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |