Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Bloomer: A Longshore Compensation Lien Was Not Reduced by a Share of Litigation Costs

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 8, 2026

Bloomer v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. examined allocation of a Longshore Act compensation lien after an injured worker settled a negligence action against the vessel owner.

The worker received compensation and sued the vessel owner

Bloomer was injured aboard the S.S. Pacific Breeze and received compensation from his employer’s carrier. He later sued the vessel owner for allegedly creating a slippery and dangerous deck.

The carrier asserted a lien against the settlement

Before a sixty-thousand-dollar settlement, the worker asked the carrier to reduce its lien by a proportionate share of the costs of obtaining the recovery. The carrier refused and intervened.

The common-fund theory did not reduce the lien

The worker argued that equity should allocate litigation expenses because the carrier benefited from the third-party recovery. The Court instead relied on the Act’s language, structure, and history.

The carrier received full reimbursement

The Court affirmed that the lien for compensation paid could not be reduced by a proportional share of attorney fees and litigation expenses under the theory presented.

Key takeaways

• Calculate compensation paid and the asserted lien before resolving a third-party claim.
• Give the carrier timely notice of the action and settlement discussions.
• Apply the current statutory allocation rules before assuming a common-fund reduction.
• Address fees, costs, reimbursement, and net recovery expressly in settlement documents.