Flexivan Leasing, Inc. v. M/V CC SAN FRANCISCO, CV 84-6331-JWC
Decision Date | 20 August 1985 |
Docket Number | CV 84-6243-JWC and CV 84-6289-JWC.,CV 84-6175-JWC,No. CV 84-6331-JWC,CV 84-6331-JWC |
Citation | 628 F. Supp. 1077 |
Parties | FLEXIVAN LEASING, INC., Genstar Container Corporation, Interpool Limited, Itel Containers International Corporations, Nautilus Leasing Services, Inc. and Transamerica ICS, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. M/V C.C. SAN FRANCISCO, her engines, tackle, apparel, furniture and fixtures, in rem, Defendants, The VESSEL C.C. SAN FRANCISCO, Garnishee. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Central District of California |
Robert E. Hawkins, Overton, Lyman & Prince, Los Angeles, Cal., for Flexivan Leasing, Inc. Reed M. Williams, Graham & James, Long Beach, Cal., for Genstar Container Corp. and Itel Containers Intern. Corp.
Ben Suter, Keesal, Young & Logan, Long Beach, Cal., for Nautilus Leasing Services, Inc. and Transamerica ICS, Inc.
David S. Porter, Fisher, Porter & Kent, Long Beach, Cal., for Interpool, Ltd.
David E.R. Woolley, Lillick, McHose & Charles, Los Angeles, Cal., for M/V C.C. San Francisco.
On July 1, 1985, in response to defendant Char Yigh Marine (Panama) S.A.'s Renoticed Motion to Compel Plaintiffs In Rem to Justify Maritime Arrests, this Court found that the in rem arrests of the vessell "CC San Francisco" by the container lessor plaintiffs were colorably valid, thereby validating this Court's continued admiralty jurisdiction over the claims. The Court therefore ordered the matter to proceed, and requested that the container claimants submit motions for summary adjudication under FRCP 56 as to all issues regarding the in rem claims which are not subject to substantial controversy.
The Court now has before it summary judgment motions brought by the container claimants seeking to establish, as a matter of law, that the containers provided to "CC Lines" give rise to maritime liens. This opinion governs the motions of Flexi-van Leasing, Inc. (CV 84-6331), Genstar Container Corporation (CV 84-6175), Interpool Limited (CV 84-6243), Itel Containers International Corporation (CV 84-6175), Nautilus Leasing Services, Inc. (CV 84-6289), and Transamerica ICS, Inc. (CV 84-6289). Although the facts and contracts relied upon differ slightly from case to case, they each present this same question of law. Rather than discussing the specific facts of each case, this order respectively adopts and incorporates by reference the Statements of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law submitted concurrently by each of the container claimants with their motions.
In this in rem action, plaintiffs seek to confirm that they have maritime liens for necessaries based on containers furnished to the vessel "CC San Francisco." Plaintiffs further seek to establish that the lien encompasses all periods the containers served as the "functional equivalent" of the vessel's hold, including incidental land uses.
The governing statute is the maritime lien statute, 46 U.S.C. § 971. It provides:
"Any person furnishing repairs, supplies, towage, use of dry dock or marine railway, or other necessaries, to any vessel, whether foreign or domestic, upon the order of the owner of such vessel, or of a person authorized by the owner, shall have a maritime lien on the vessel, which may be enforced by suit in rem, and it shall not be necessary to allege or prove that credit was given to the vessel."
The first requirement for a maritime lien under § 971 is that the container or equipment be a "necessary." A "necessary" is any item furnished to a vessel which is reasonably necessary for the venture in which that particular ship is engaged. Clubb Oil & Tools, Inc. v. M/V George Vergottis, 460 F.Supp. 835, 841 (S.D.Tex. 1978). Containers are portable receptacles in which large numbers of smaller packages may be transported. They are the modern substitute for the hold of the vessel. Leather's Best, Inc. v. Mormaclynx, 451 F.2d 800, 815 (2nd Cir.1971). It is clearly established that containers are necessary to a container ship's operation. Nautilus Leasing Services, Inc. v. M/V Cosmos, et al., 1983 AMC 1483 (S.D.N.Y. 1983); Transamerica ICS, Inc., v. M/V Panatlantic, 1984 AMC 489 (S.D.Fla.1983). Since the "CC San Francisco" carried only containerized cargo while in the service of the "CC Line," containers were more than reasonably necessary for her operation.
The second requirement, and the one around which this controversy is centered, is that the containers be "furnished to" the "CC San Francisco." It is undisputed by the parties that the containers were supplied by the container claimants to "CC Lines" for use in its transpacific shipping service between various ports in the Far East and the West Coast of the United States.
However, because the containers were not supplied to the "CC San Francisco" specifically, defendant argues that the "furnishing to any vessel" requirement has not been met. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, submit that by furnishing containers to "CC Lines" for exclusive use on board its fleet of container vessels, and by virtue of their actual use on board the "CC San Francisco," plaintiffs furnished containers to the vessel within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 971. The Court agrees with plaintiffs.
Northwest Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo, 432 U.S. 249, 270, 97 S.Ct. 2348, 2360, 53 L.Ed. 320 (1977) (footnote omitted).
One of the key advantages of containers is that they allow the use of several different modes of transportation—marine, motor, rail, or air—to transport goods on a door to door basis. See Tombari, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bollinger Quick Repair, Inc. v. M/V Goliath
...maritime lien against it. The district court held that the lessor had an enforceable maritime lien. Flexivan Leasing, Inc. v. M/V C.C. SAN FRANCISCO, 628 F.Supp. 1077, 1080 (C.D.Cal.1985) (subsequent history omitted). The Ninth Circuit reversed. While the Ninth Circuit agreed that the conta......
-
Cummins Financial, Inc. v. Vessel Rose of Rock River, 90 C 20059.
...to anything furnished to a vessel which is reasonably necessary for the vessel's venture, Flexivan Leasing, Inc. v. M/V C.C. San Francisco, 628 F.Supp. 1077, 1078 (C.D.Cal.1985), rev'd sub nom., Foss Launch & Tug Co. v. Char Ching Shipping U.S.A., Ltd., 808 F.2d 697 (9th Cir.), cert. denied......
-
Foss Launch & Tug Co. v. Char Ching Shipping U.S.A., Ltd.
...as the functional equivalent of the hold of the "CC San Francisco," including incidental land use. Flexivan Leasing, Inc. v. M/V C.C. San Francisco, 628 F.Supp. 1077, 1080 (C.D.Cal.1985). Appellants raise a number of issues on appeal. The first issue is whether the district court had admira......
-
Interpool Ltd. v. Char Yigh Marine (Panama) S.A.
...attach order and a writ of attachment. Char Yigh appeared in district court in September of 1984 to oppose this application. 628 F.Supp. 1077, 1080 (C.D.Cal.1985) ("[C]onsistent with modern shipping practices, the Court holds that the delivery of containers to a fleet of vessels, without sp......