Shera Hodgson Williams v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd.

At a glance

Parties

Shera Hodgson Williams (seafarer, plaintiff) v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. (cruise line, defendant)

Case no.

U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, No. 18-22774-CV-WILLIAMS/TORRES

Court

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida: Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres, on referral from District Judge Kathleen M. Williams

Underlying award(s)

Final Award of arbitrator Melvia B. Green, sent to the parties on 10 April 2018 (seafarer's claims dismissed)

Forum and rules

Arbitration under the seafarer's agreement, which refers to the New York Convention; court review under Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 201–208)

Treaty

New York Convention 1958, Article V

Sector

Maritime employment; cruise industry

Outcome

The Magistrate Judge recommended denying the motion to vacate, granting the cross-motion to confirm, affirming the award, and denying sanctions.

The dispute

Shera Hodgson Williams worked for NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. as a restaurant steward. She said she began to have back pain in July 2013 after slipping in a ship's galley; NCL denied that the incident happened. Her seafarer's agreement sent all employment claims to binding arbitration under the New York Convention. She brought claims for Jones Act negligence, unseaworthiness, failure to pay maintenance and cure, and disability benefits under NCL's collective bargaining agreement. The main dispute was whether NCL had to pay for back surgery performed by Dr. Thomas Roush on 30 September 2016. The arbitrator found that the surgery was not medically necessary and that she had reached maximum medical cure, and dismissed all her claims. Hodgson then moved to vacate the award. She argued that the arbitrator exceeded her authority, that the award was arbitrary, capricious and manifestly unjust, that the arbitration clause was void, and that the award was contrary to U.S. public policy. NCL cross-moved to confirm the award and asked for sanctions.

Key holdings

1. Under 9 U.S.C. § 207, a court may refuse to confirm a Convention award only on the grounds listed in Article V. Most of Hodgson's challenges disputed the arbitrator's evidentiary and legal findings, and a court cannot review those in a summary confirmation proceeding. pp. 6–8
2. The arbitrator did not exceed her authority. The arbitration clause expressly covered personal injury, Jones Act, maintenance and cure, unseaworthiness and wage claims. Because the right to maintenance and cure ends at maximum cure, the arbitrator could also decide when maximum medical cure was reached. pp. 9, 13
3. Following Industrial Risk Insurers, the Convention does not allow an award to be refused because it is "arbitrary and capricious" or "manifestly unjust". The defences listed in Article V are exclusive. pp. 9–10
4. The challenge to the arbitration clause in the seafarer's agreement fails. Arguments based on foreign birth, unequal bargaining power and lack of knowing consent have already been rejected in the Eleventh Circuit (Lindo, Bautista and other cases). pp. 10–11
5. The public policy defence in Article V(2)(b) is read narrowly. Admitting alleged hearsay and weighing the evidence did not violate basic notions of morality and justice. The rule that doubts are resolved in favour of seamen as "wards of admiralty" applies only where there is an ambiguity, and the arbitrator found none. pp. 11–14
6. NCL's request for sanctions under Hercules Steel is denied. Hodgson's challenge failed, but the court could not say she lacked an objectively reasonable belief that she might succeed, or that she had no real legal basis for it. pp. 15–16

Procedural history

1. 30 September 2016Dr. Thomas Roush performs back surgery (bilateral laminotomy with microdiscectomy at L5-S1) on Hodgson.
2. 10 April 2018Arbitrator Melvia B. Green sends the parties her Final Award, which rejects all of Hodgson's claims.
3. 10 July 2018Hodgson files a motion to vacate the award in the Southern District of Florida.
4. 16 July 2018Judge Kathleen M. Williams refers all dispositive matters to Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres.
5. 30 July 2018NCL files a cross-motion to confirm the award and requests sanctions.
6. 6 November 2018Report and Recommendation entered on the docket (signed as of 7 November 2018). It recommends denying vacatur, confirming the award and denying sanctions. The published documents do not show the District Judge's final ruling.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Edwin G. Torres Judge, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida — appointed by a court (United States Magistrate Judge; Report and Recommendation)
• Kathleen M. Williams Judge, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (District Judge who referred the motions)
• Melvia B. Green Sole arbitrator (arbitrator who made the underlying Final Award)

Experts

Amar Rajaddhyaksha (respondent)

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• New York Convention Article V
• public policy defence
• Article V(2)(b)
• confirmation of award
• motion to vacate
• seafarer arbitration
• maintenance and cure
• maximum medical cure
• Jones Act
• unseaworthiness
• wards of admiralty
• arbitrary and capricious
• manifest disregard
• excess of authority
• sanctions
• cruise line
• Industrial Risk Insurers
• Lindo v. NCL

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.