46 U.S.C. § 10317
Loss of lien and right to wages
A master or seaman by any agreement other than one provided for in this chapter may not forfeit the master’s or seaman’s lien on the vessel or be deprived of a remedy to which the master or seaman otherwise would be entitled for the recovery of wages. A stipulation in an agreement inconsistent with this chapter, or a stipulation by which a seaman consents to abandon a right to wages if the vessel is lost, or to abandon a right the seaman may have or obtain in the nature of salvage, is void.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1987–2009 · leading case: Balen v. Holland Am. Line Inc., 583 F.3d 647 (9th Cir. 2009).
Balen v. Holland Am. Line Inc., 583 F.3d 647 (9th Cir. 2009). “Section 10317 provides: A master or seaman by any agreement other than one provided for in this chapter may not forfeit the master’s or seaman’s lien on the vessel or be deprived of a remedy to which the master or seaman otherwise would be entitled for the recovery of wages.”
Rogers v. Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, 547 F.3d 1148 (9th Cir. 2008). “46 U.S.C. § 10317 ("A ... seaman by any agreement .”
Fanos v. Maersk Line, Ltd., 246 F. Supp. 2d 676 (S.D. Tex. 2003). “The vouchers list the components of the vacation benefit calculation, including starting and ending work dates, the number of days worked, the vacation rate, the number of vacation days, and the daily wage. Plaintiff alleges that the vacation benefit is a seamen’s wage under 46…”
In Re the Complaint of the City of New York, as Owner & Operator of the M/V Andrew J. Barberi, 534 F. Supp. 2d 370 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “Similarly, under 46 U.S.C.A. § 10317 (1983), “a stipulation by which a seaman consents .”
Fanos v. Maersk Line, Ltd., 363 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 2004). “§ 10313 , and (2) that the 1985 memorandum of understanding, which reduced the benefit, was an illegal agreement under 46 U.S.C. § 10317 . Fanos also alleges that the memorandum of understanding is unenforceable because he was never informed of its existence.”
Falgout Bros., Inc. v. S/V PANGAEA, 966 F. Supp. 1143 (S.D. Ala. 1997). “See 46 U.S.C. § 10317 (1994); The Steamer Adirondack, 5 F.”
Anderson v. McAllister Towing & Transp. Co., 17 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (S.D. Ala. 1998). “Furthermore, plaintiff's reference to 46 U.S.C. § 10317 also fails to generate or preserve a statutory claim for wages.”
Claudius M. Dowdle, Cross-Appellee v. Offshore Express, Inc., Cross-Appellant, 809 F.2d 259 (5th Cir. 1987). “46 U.S.C. § 10317 (“a master or seaman by any agreement other than one provided for in this chapter may not .”
Balen v. Holland Am. Inc (9th Cir. 2009). “46 U.S.C. § 10317 [3] Balen contends that the arbitration agreement is void under 46 U.”
Rogers v. Royal Caribbean (9th Cir. 2008). “46 U.S.C. § 10317 (“A . . . seaman by any agreement .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.