In Vassallo v. Nederl-Amerik Stoomv Maats Holland, 337 S.W.2d 309, 313 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 1960), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 162 Tex. 52, 344 S.W.2d 421 (Tex. 1961), a longshoreman was killed while working on a vessel owned by one of the defendants. Although the defense of contributory negligence applied to the heirs' survival claim, the decedent's claim, had he survived, would have fallen under general maritime law and been subject only to comparative negligence, not contributory negligence. See Vassallo, 337 S.W.2d at 311-12. The heirs argued that the survival statute provided them the same cause of action available to the decedent had he lived; therefore, the defendants were entitled only to those defenses they could have asserted against the decedent. See Vassallo, 337 S.W.2d at 310-11. The court held that the heirs were entitled to recover whatever the decedent could have recovered had he survived; thus, the defendants could assert comparative negligence as a defense but not contributory negligence. See Vassallo, 337 S.W.2d at 313.