As one of the oldest bodies of law, Maritime and Admiralty Law began long before the United States existed. Today, it continues to be one of the most complex areas of American law. Many distinct factors must be evaluated in maritime personal injury litigation that may be irrelevant to cases not involving water, boats, ships and the shipping industry.    

Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (also known as the Jones Act)

Prior to the passage of the Merchant Marine Act in June of 1920, the merchant marine had little protection in the event they were injured while out at sea. The act is a United States federal statute that sets forth regulations for maritime commerce in U.S. waters, as well as between United States ports. It is commonly referred to as the Jones Act, in honor of its leading advocate in congress, Senator Wesley L. Jones (d. 1932). The Jones Act protects each person working on a ship from the ship’s captain all the way down to the last crew member. It allows injured seamen to recover damages if they can prove their employer or co-worker was responsible for causing the work-related harbor accident. The act has an additional component that supports for the United States shipping industry. The statute requires all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships built in the U.S., owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. residents. 

A variety of factors can affect whether someone qualifies for compensation under the Jones Act, such as:

• Where the maritime accident occurred
• Whether the employer can be held liable for the harbor accident
• Whether the individual injured or killed was working on-the-job as a seaman

The U.S. federal government allows injured seamen to recover damages if they can prove their employer or co-worker was responsible for causing the work-related harbor accident. However, unlike claims pursued through the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, negligence must be proven before compensation can be secured. Liability factors to be investigated include:

• Failing to properly train seamen
• Failing to hire qualified harbor workers
• Failing to maintain proper safety equipment
• Failing to follow or enforce standard safety procedures
• Failing to properly maintain the vessel
   

As far as determining whether a worker qualifies as a "seaman: for the purposes of the Jones Act, the United States Supreme Court ( Harbor Tug and Barge Company v. Papai ) has said the essential requirements for seaman status are twofold.  

• an employee's duties must contribute to the function of the vessel or to the accomplishment of its mission
• a seaman must have a connection to a vessel in navigation (or to an identifiable group of such vessels) that is substantial in terms of both its duration and its nature

An action may be brought under the Jones Act in either a state court or in a U.S. federal court. With a Jones Act claim, the seaman is entitled to a jury trial, which is a right that is not ordinarily afforded under maritime law. In addition to claims of negligence, a seaman under this act is entitled to maintenance and cure. This is the legal requirement of an employer to provide the injured with medical care, as well as with basic living expenses while they are recovering.