conditions on the dock. 8 A.S.R.2d. at 149. Whereas the dockworker in Star-Kist had no overall duty to maintain the safety of the dock upon which he was injured, Sardina, as the ship’s Master, had a general duty to maintain the safety of the Kassandra Z. 3 Prejudgment interest is not available for Jones Act claims brought at law. Barrios v. La. Constr. Materials Co., 465 F.2d 1157, 1167-68 (5th Cir. 1972). Appellees cite Panama R.R. v. Johnson, 264 U.S. 375 (1924), for the proposition that the availability of prejudgment interest should be uniform whether a Jones Act claim is brought at law or in admiralty. But Panama Railroad did not hold that the Jones Act limits the remedies available to seamen who bring a claim in admiralty to the same remedies available at law. 264 U.S. at 391 (<HOLDING>). 4 The Trial Division has, however, recognized
holding that a defendant that invokes the jurisdiction of a court as a plaintiff waives its personal jurisdiction defense in all actions related to the claim for which it invoked the courts jurisdiction holding that the jones act provides an independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction holding that a complaint that asserts both admiralty jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction is not an adequate 9h designation to trigger admiralty procedures holding that the jones act does not encroach on the admiralty jurisdiction intended by the constitution but permits that jurisdiction to be invoked and exercised as it has been from the beginning holding that courts apply substantive admiralty law to claims that sound in admiralty regardless of whether the complaint invokes diversity or admiralty jurisdiction