We affirm, for essentially the reasons given in the reported opinions of the district court. See Adriatic Marine, LLC v. Harrington, 446 F. Supp. 3d 126 (E.D. La. 2020); Adriatic Marine, LLC v. Harrington, 442 F. Supp. 3d 929 (E.D. La. 2020). First, the record contains no evidence establishing the causation element for either Harringtons Jones Act negligence claim or his unseaworthiness claim. See Jones v. United States, 936 F.3d 318, 321–24 (5th Cir. 2019). Second, as to Harringtons maintenance and cure claim, the record contains uncontradicted evidence that Harrington did not disclose his medical history of back injury when asked to do so on Adriatic Marines pre-employment questionnaire. It is legally irrelevant whether Harrington had subjective intent to deceive or whether his subsequent medical history indicated his back was not injured. See Brown v. Parker Drilling Offshore Corp., 410 F.3d 166, 171–76 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, Adriatic Marine is entitled to summary judgment for all of Harringtons claims.
As a result, the arguments related to Harringtons expert evidence are moot, and we do not address them.
AFFIRMED.
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE
Per Curiam:*
FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.