Louisiana Family Loses Wrongful Death Claim After Fifth Circuit Rules Fatal Fentanyl Overdose Was a Superseding Cause of Maritime Injury
In a significant maritime ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a wrongful death award stemming from a crane accident aboard the OC160 barge. The court held that the fatal overdose of welder Bosit Bommarito—who died months after a serious workplace injury—was a superseding cause that severed the chain of legal causation. The case, Belle Chasse Marine Transportation, LLC v. Bommarito (No. 22-30382), clarified several key issues in maritime law, including appurtenance liability, corporate veil-piercing, and the limits of proximate cause under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA).
Maritime Welder Injured by Defective Crane Hook Lacking Safety Latch Aboard OC160 Barge
Bommarito, a welder in Louisiana, was helping construct walkways for a launch site on the Mississippi River. During a crane lift aboard the OC160 barge, he was struck by a hook that detached from the load and caused him to fall 9–12 feet. The hook, designed and fabricated by employees of Belle Chasse Land Transportation, lacked a safety latch—a violation of OSHA and maritime safety standards.
The barge, crane, and hook system were part of launch construction operations conducted by Belle Chasse Marine and its subsidiary. The district court found that Bommarito was forced to hold tension on the lines due to the hook’s design, keeping him dangerously close to the lift area. The resulting injuries included a fractured orbital floor, cervical disc displacement, and chronic shoulder pain, requiring surgery and long-term medication.
Court Finds Crane Hook Was Defective Vessel Appurtenance Under Admiralty Extension Act
The appellate court agreed with the district court’s ruling that the hook was an appurtenance of the vessel. Although designed and built by a land-based entity, the hook was stored aboard and used with the barge’s crane system. The unsafe condition of the hook played a direct role in the accident, satisfying the requirements for federal maritime jurisdiction.
The court emphasized that appurtenance status does not depend on formal ownership, and it affirmed the lower court’s finding that Belle Chasse Land and Belle Chasse Marine operated as a fused enterprise. Evidence showed that the two entities shared HR, finances, insurance, officers, and equipment, and that Land existed solely to serve Marine.
Fifth Circuit Rules Overdose Was Superseding Cause That Broke Legal Chain of Causation
The most consequential part of the decision centered on whether Bommarito’s later overdose could be legally attributed to the crane accident. After his prescriptions ended, he allegedly turned to street fentanyl mixed with xylazine, a veterinary tranquilizer not approved for human use. Toxicology reports showed a fentanyl concentration six times the lethal level.
The court ruled that this overdose was not a foreseeable consequence of the workplace injury. Because the drugs were not prescribed and were obtained illegally, the court found that Bommarito’s death could not be traced back to the employer’s negligence. The voluntary ingestion of illicit substances was deemed a superseding cause under maritime law, cutting off liability for wrongful death damages.
Dissenting Judge Argues Overdose Was Driven by Intractable Pain and Not Legally Independent
In a dissent, Judge Haynes disagreed with the majority’s causation analysis. She cited medical testimony that overdose deaths often occur among pain patients who are abruptly cut off from prescribed opioids. According to the dissent, the record supported the view that Bommarito’s drug use was directly linked to uncontrolled post-accident pain and not an unforeseeable, independent act.
The dissent emphasized the deferential clear-error standard and argued that the trial court’s finding—that the overdose was a direct result of the injury—was supported by substantial evidence and should not have been reversed.
Maritime Law Implications for LHWCA, Appurtenance Liability, and Wrongful Death Claims
This case carries important implications for maritime practitioners and employers alike:
- Unsafe crane equipment used aboard vessels can qualify as a vessel appurtenance, even if fabricated by a land-based affiliate.
- Federal courts will apply admiralty law in veil-piercing cases when two entities function as a single operational unit.
- Courts may treat voluntary ingestion of illegal drugs as a superseding cause that severs liability, even when initiated by pain from a maritime injury.
- Non-dependent parents of deceased longshore workers cannot recover wrongful death damages under federal maritime law for deaths occurring in territorial waters.
Although the companies remain liable for Bommarito’s personal injuries, the Fifth Circuit’s decision shields them from further wrongful death damages due to the unforeseeable and unlawful nature of the overdose.
Contact our maritime injury attorneys if you have questions about LHWCA claims, vessel negligence, or maritime wrongful death cases.
Disclaimer: Our firm does not represent the plaintiff in this case and is not involved in the litigation. The information provided is a summary of allegations based on publicly available court filings. We make no representations about the truth of these allegations, are not commenting on the merits of the case, and are not predicting any outcome.
