IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE F/V JOEY D AND OCEANSIDE MARINE, LLC
1:24-cv-05335
| D.N.J. | May 13, 2024Background
- Oceanside Marine LLC, owner of the commercial fishing vessel "Joey D," filed a complaint to limit its liability after a deckhand suffered chemical burns from mustard gas found among clams on an October 7, 2023, voyage.
- Oceanside sought exoneration and limitation of liability under the Shipowners’ Limitation of Liability Act and Rule F of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty and Maritime Claims.
- The company requested the court accept an Ad Interim Stipulation of Value in lieu of a cash security, issue a monition to claimants, and restrain other lawsuits regarding the incident.
- To obtain this relief, strict statutory and procedural requirements mandate a vessel owner to provide security for claimants and for court costs, offer sufficient proof of vessel value, and account for interest on the security.
- Oceanside’s submission included an attorney affidavit regarding vessel value and insurance coverage, but lacked formal supporting documentation such as an appraisal or insurance letters of undertaking, and failed to address required cost and interest provisions.
- The court denied Oceanside’s requested relief, citing deficient evidence and procedural failures, but allowed for re-filing upon correcting these deficiencies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of security for costs and claims | Stipulation of value, backed by affidavit and insurance, suffices | N/A | Stipulation insufficient; lacks cost security |
| Adequacy of evidence on vessel’s value | Affidavit by attorney, based on owner's statement, is sufficient | N/A | No formal appraisal; affidavit is inadequate |
| Insurance as security for claims | Info from insurers is enough; excess insurers back stipulation | N/A | No letters of undertaking or clarity on coverage |
| Compliance with procedural requirements (motion, interest) | Complaint requests relief without motion, ignores interest | N/A | Formal motion needed; must add 6% interest |
Key Cases Cited
- Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. of Hartford v. S. Pac. Co., 273 U.S. 207 (1927) (stipulations as substitute security in admiralty)
- Panaconti Ship. Co. v. M/V Ypapanti, 865 F.2d 705 (5th Cir. 1989) (letters of undertaking can secure claims without vessel arrest)