A seaman gets hurt offshore. Weeks later, recovering at home, he spends a single night in jail over something minor: a bar fight, a DUI, an unpaid ticket. His employer stops the maintenance check that same week. Not because the injury changed. Not because the claim weakened. Because of a legal precedent that has nothing to do with his case and everything to do with a courtroom decision from decades ago.
At The Maritime Injury Law Firm, we’ve spent over 20 years representing Gulf Coast maritime workers, and this is one of the most misunderstood corners of the Jones Act. Most seamen have no idea this exception exists until the payment stops.
Why Maintenance and Cure Exist in the First Place
Maintenance and cure are no-fault benefits owed to injured seamen from the date of injury through Maximum Medical Improvement. No-fault means exactly that: you don’t have to prove your employer caused your injury, only that it happened while you were in the service of the vessel.
Maintenance covers daily living costs during recovery: rent or mortgage, utilities, food, property taxes, insurance, paid on a bi-weekly basis.
Cure covers medical treatment tied to the injury, including transportation to appointments, paid directly to providers.
This is what makes maintenance and cure some of the strongest workers’ compensation protections in the country. It’s also exactly why maritime employers look for any technicality that lets them stop paying.
The Jail Exception: What the Law Actually Says
Jail time is one of the few circumstances where courts have allowed employers to suspend maintenance payments entirely. Under established maritime precedent, an employer is not obligated to pay maintenance for any period a seaman spends incarcerated, even a single night, even for a minor offense unrelated to the injury or the job.
That rule was built on a version of maritime life that no longer exists. When the precedent was set, sailors rarely owned property or carried mortgages, and maintenance was understood mainly as a food allowance, something jail already provided, which is how courts justified cutting it off.
That reasoning hasn’t kept pace with reality. Today’s seamen carry mortgages, rent leases, and pay for insurance and utilities whether they spend the night in a jail cell or their own bed. None of those obligations pause because of an arrest. The precedent, however, hasn’t caught up, and employers rely on that gap.
No Current Exceptions, But the Details Still Matter
As of now, there is no carve-out to this rule. It doesn’t matter how minor the charge was, whether it was dismissed, or whether it had any connection to the injury or the vessel. A single overnight stay is enough for an employer to point to the precedent and stop payment.
What does matter is making sure an employer isn’t using an arrest as cover to cut off benefits beyond what the law actually allows. For example: suspending maintenance indefinitely rather than for the specific period of incarceration, or using it as a pretext to close the claim altogether. That distinction is where a maritime attorney’s involvement changes the outcome.
What Maritime Employers Do With This Kind of Opening
Employers and their insurers don’t need much to justify delaying or reducing a payment. An arrest, even one unrelated to your offshore work, is often enough. Once maintenance stops, it can be difficult to get it restarted at the correct rate, and some employers use the interruption as leverage to push toward a lower settlement on the underlying claim.
This is a pattern worth recognizing: any gap or technicality in your case will be used to minimize what you’re owed, not to clarify what’s fair. That’s true whether the issue is a night in jail, a disputed medical opinion, or a maintenance rate set below what the law requires.
FAQ’s About Maintenance and Cure
If I’m released the same day, does my employer still stop payments?
The precedent applies to any period of incarceration, regardless of length. A same-day release doesn’t automatically restore payment for that period, though it should not affect maintenance owed before or after.
Can my employer stop cure (medical benefits) too, not just maintenance?
Cure and maintenance are treated separately in most cases. An arrest affecting maintenance doesn’t automatically justify cutting off your medical treatment, and employers who conflate the two may be overstepping what the law allows.
What if the charges are later dismissed or I’m found not guilty?
The precedent generally turns on the fact of incarceration during the relevant period, not the outcome of the case. This is one of the more counterintuitive parts of the rule and worth discussing directly with an attorney if it applies to you.
Can my employer use this rule to deny my entire claim, not just the maintenance during incarceration?
No. The jail exception is narrow: it applies to the payment obligation during the specific period of incarceration. If an employer is using it to challenge your underlying injury claim or cut off benefits beyond that window, that goes beyond what the precedent supports.
Is there any effort to change this rule?
Not currently at the federal level. The exception remains part of established maritime precedent, and any change would likely come through future case law rather than legislation.
Contact The Maritime Injury Law Firm
The Jones Act is broad, but its exceptions can be just as consequential as its protections. If your maintenance payments have been reduced or cut off, for this reason or any other, talking to a maritime attorney before the situation escalates protects you from losing more than the law allows.
Contact The Maritime Injury Law Firm for a free, confidential consultation.
