Pires v. Frota Oceanica Brasileira, S.A.
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Heller v. Frota Oceanica E Amazonica, S.A. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- Holley v. Transoceanic Cable Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Pires v. Frota Oceanica Brasileira, S.A. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Judg
We previously held in Public Adm’r of County of N. Y. v Frota Oceanica Brasileira (222 AD2d 332, lv dismissed 88 NY2d 920) that damages for nonpecuniary loss are unavailable under general maritime law, and that punitive damages are nonpecuniary damages such that punitive damages are also unavailable under general maritime law. It is now settled that, given the primacy of the concern for uniformity of maritime law as expressed in Miles v Apex Mar. Corp. (498 US 19), a plaintiff in a maintenance and cure case cannot obtain punitive damages (see, Guevara v Maritime Overseas Corp., 59 F3d 1496), and damages for loss of consortium are also unavailable (see, Ellender v Graham & Co., 821 F Supp 1136). In light of the vacatur of the punitive damages award, the trial court may wish to consider an award of attorney’s fees to plaintiffs (see, Paris v Waterman S. S. Corp., 218 AD2d 561, 565, appeal withdrawn 87 NY2d 860; Glynn v Roy Al Boat Mgt. Corp., 57 F3d 1495, 1501, cert denied 516 US 1046). We have considered defendant-appellant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Williams and Tom, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.