627 F.3d 183
5th Cir.2010Background
- Alphamate sought a Rule B maritime attachment in New Orleans on a shipment of corn aboard the M/V GOLDEN STAR intended for AFL in Tripoli, Libya.
- CHS and CHS Europe intervened, contending they owned the corn because title had not transferred to AFL, which had not paid.
- The district court granted the attachment ex parte, then vacated it after finding title remained with CHS under English law as applied by POLLUX.
- Aphamate posted a $250,000 bond for costs; CHS sought to vacate the attachment and release the cargo.
- The Fifth Circuit held the district court lacked maritime jurisdiction from the outset because the contracts were not wholly maritime and demurrage was not severable.
- The judgment was VACATED and the case REMANDED for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had maritime jurisdiction to issue Rule B attachment | Alphamate argues demurrage is severable maritime obligation creating jurisdiction | CHS argues contract is not maritime and title remained with CHS | Jurisdiction lacking; attachment vacated and remanded |
| Whether demurrage/detention claims are severable from non-maritime contract claims | Alphamate contends separable maritime demurrage obligations exist | CHS argues demurrage is intertwined with non-maritime breach | Not severable; court lacks maritime claim |
| Whether the case remains live despite mootness concerns | Alphamate retains potential remedy via bond and related damages | Appellees contend case moot since property left jurisdiction | Case remains live; judgment can have concrete value and thus remains within appellate jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. v. Kirby, 543 U.S. 14 (Supreme Court, 2004) (maritime jurisdiction requires direct and substantial link to sea transportation)
- Lucky-Goldstar Int'l (America) Inc. v. Phibro Energy Int'l Ltd., 958 F.2d 58 (5th Cir. 1992) (mixed contracts not maritime unless separable or primarily maritime)
- Foremost Ins. Co. v. Richardson, 457 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1982) (emphasizes focus on protection of maritime commerce)
- Berwind-White Coal Mining Co. v. City of New York, 135 F.2d 443 (2d Cir. 1943) (severability of maritime obligations depends on ability to litigate maritime part separately)
- Republic Nat. Bank of Miami v. United States, 506 U.S. 80 (Supreme Court, 1992) (retention of jurisdiction where judgment has operative effect despite mootness)