Youry Tundidor v. Miami-Dade County
831 F.3d 1328
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff Youry Tundidor was injured when he struck a water pipe while a passenger on a pleasure boat in the Coral Park Canal (Miami‑Dade County) and sued the County for negligence under admiralty jurisdiction.
- The Coral Park Canal connects to the Tamiami (C‑4) Canal, which in turn connects to the Miami River and ultimately Biscayne Bay/Atlantic Ocean.
- Between the Coral Park Canal and the Miami River there are multiple low bridges, submerged supports, railroad tracks, and the S‑25B water control structure with underwater gates that prevent surface navigation eastward; signage warns against boating beyond the structure.
- The County moved to dismiss for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction, arguing the canal lacks a navigable interstate connection because of these artificial obstructions.
- The district court dismissed for lack of admiralty jurisdiction; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding the canal is not navigable for admiralty purposes because the artificial obstruction prevents interstate commercial navigation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Coral Park Canal is a "navigable water" for admiralty jurisdiction (location requirement) | Canal is navigable either under a historical‑navigability test or because it is capable of navigation with minor portage around S‑25B | Artificial obstructions (S‑25B and low bridges) prevent interstate commercial navigation, so canal is not navigable for admiralty purposes | Held: Not navigable — artificial obstruction (S‑25B) prevents interstate commerce, so admiralty jurisdiction fails |
Key Cases Cited
- The Daniel Ball, 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 557 (U.S. 1870) (defines navigable waters as those usable as highways for commerce in ordinary condition)
- Aqua Log, Inc. v. Lost & Abandoned Pre‑Cut Logs & Rafts of Logs, 709 F.3d 1055 (11th Cir. 2013) (waterway navigable if presently capable of supporting commercial activity)
- Adams v. Montana Power Co., 528 F.2d 437 (9th Cir. 1975) (artificial damming that eliminates commercial activity defeats admiralty jurisdiction)
- LeBlanc v. Cleveland, 198 F.3d 353 (2d Cir. 1999) (portage and recreational use insufficient to establish navigability for admiralty)
- Alford v. Appalachian Power Co., 951 F.2d 30 (4th Cir. 1991) (waters confined within a state and not part of interstate waterway are not admiralty concerns)
- Exxon Corp. v. Cent. Gulf Lines, Inc., 500 U.S. 603 (U.S. 1991) (admiralty jurisdictional boundaries analyzed by reference to the purpose of the grant)
- Sea Vessel, Inc. v. Reyes, 23 F.3d 345 (11th Cir. 1994) (recognition that Miami River is navigable)