EWELL, Md. — William Smith Dize's life revolved around water.
The boat captain worked the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, and when he wasn't operating a boat, he was working on them and around the dock.
But when Dize got sick and sued his employer in 2008, claiming a boat maintenance project led to a deadly respiratory illness, his bosses said his work did not qualify him to be a “seaman,” a designation needed to sue his employer under a federal law.
Dize died in 2012. His widow, Jennifer, is asking the Supreme Court to take her husband's case. Some experts say the case could prove important to thousands of maritime workers who spend long periods on land and shorter bursts at sea, including salmon fishermen in Alaska, workers on fire boats and salvage vessels, and even those who repair undersea telephone cables.
The justices are scheduled to discuss whether to take the case as part of a private conference Monday.
A 1995 Supreme Court decision said that someone who spends about 30 percent or more of his time “in the service of a vessel in navigation” is a “seaman” qualified to sue under that law. Dize didn't spend 30 percent of his time captaining a boat, but his lawyers argued that the boat maintenance work he did counts toward the requirement.
In asking the Supreme Court to take the case, Dize's lawyers say courts nationwide are split on what work counts toward the 30 percent rule, and that the high court should resolve the confusion.
Dize's former employer disagrees. Lawyers wrote in court papers that the Dizes can't sue under the Jones Act and instead have a workers' compensation claim.
