Jurgens v. Poling Transp. Corp., 96 CV 1265.
Decision Date | 19 September 2000 |
Docket Number | No. 96 CV 1265.,No. 96 CV 1768.,96 CV 1265.,96 CV 1768. |
Citation | 113 F.Supp.2d 388 |
Parties | John F. JURGENS, Gail Jurgens, Bridget Jurgens and Kate Jurgens, Plaintiffs, v. POLING TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION, Chester A. Poling, Inc., Mabel L. Poling Corp., Motor Vessel Poling Bros. 9, Inc., Metro Fuel Oil Corporation, Metro Terminals Corp., Ultimate Transport Inc., Janet Mahland, the Anthony J., the Clara P. and the Jeanne C., their tackle, engines and appurtenances, etc. in Rem, Defendants. Philip Becker and Patricia Becker, Plaintiffs, v. Poling Transportation Corporation, Chester A. Poling, Inc., Mabel L. Poling Corp., Motor Vessel Poling Bros. 9, Inc., Metro Fuel Oil Corporation, Metro Terminals Corp., Ultimate Transport Inc., Janet Mahland, the Anthony J., the Clara P. and the Jeanne C., their tackle, engines and appurtenances, etc. in Rem, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Bantle & Levy LLP(Lee F. Bantle, of counsel), New York City, for plaintiffs John, Gail, Bridget, and Kate Jurgens.
Cappiello, Hoffman & Katz, P.C.(Paul T. Hoffman, of counsel), New York City, for plaintiffs Philip and Patricia Becker.
Freehill, Hogan & Mahar(John J. Walsh, of counsel), New York City, for defendantsPoling Transportation Corporation, Chester A. Poling, Inc., Motor Vessel PolingBros. No. 9, Inc., Janet Mahland, and Mabel L. Poling Corp.
Jacobowitz, Garfinkel & Lesman(Frank A. Lisi, of counsel), New York City, for defendantMetro Fuel Oil Corporation.
Callan, Regenstreich, Koster & Brady(Joseph H. Herbert, III, of counsel), New York City, for defendant Ultimate Transport.Inc.
PlaintiffsJohn F. Jurgens and Philip Becker, seamen employed on the ANTHONY J, a commercial vessel, brought these consolidated actions against the named defendants under the admiralty law as modified by the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 688, the general maritime law, 28 U.S.C. § 1333, and the common law of negligence, seeking recovery for injuries they sustained from a fire while transferring gasoline from a barge called THE CLARA P. into a fuel truck.
The only defendants now remaining before the court are Janet P. Mahland, Metro Fuel Oil Corp., and Metro Terminals Corp.The other defendants are no longer parties before the court.
Plaintiffs have moved for partial summary judgment against defendantJanet P. Mahland, and she has cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaints as to her.DefendantsMetro Fuel Oil Corp. and Metro Terminals Corp. have also moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaints as to them.
Plaintiffs Jurgens and Becker were seaman working on the coastal tanker called THE ANTHONY J. Jurgens as captain and Becker as chief engineer.The record contains conflicting evidence as to whether plaintiffs were employed by defendantPoling Transportation Corporation or defendantChester A. Poling, Inc.
DefendantChester A. Poling, Inc.(Chester A. Poling) is the parent corporation of Poling Transportation Corporation(Poling Transportation).Poling Transportation, in turn, is the corporate parent of several corporations that own or owned one or more vessels in navigation, among them the defendantMotor Vessel PolingBros. No. 9, which owned a barge called THE CLARA P.Another Poling Transportation subsidiary owned THE ANTHONY J.
Janet Mahland was in August 1995 a director and president of Poling Transportation and Motor Vessel PolingBros. No. 9, and president of Chester A. Poling.The court entered a default judgment against all three corporations.
DefendantsMetro Fuel Oil Corporation(Metro Fuel) and Metro Terminals Corp.(Metro Terminals) collectively "Metro," are companies based in Brooklyn, New York, in the business of buying, selling and distributing petroleum products.Metro Fuel is a marketing entity that buys and sells petroleum products using terminal facilities owned by Metro Terminals.Metro Terminals is also licensed to buy and sell gasoline.Joseph Squadrito was a purchase and sales manager for Metro Fuel, and also handled purchases made by Metro Terminals.
DefendantUltimate Transport Inc.("Ultimate") owned and operated a small fleet of trucks for transporting fuel oil and other products.
The Court entered default judgment against Ultimate on March 10, 1997.Ultimate and plaintiffs entered into a settlement agreement on April 14, 2000.
The Proposed Sale of THE CLARA P.
In August 1995 THE CLARA P. was moored at a dock operated by Poling Transportation in Staten Island, New York.A person the parties knew only as "Marcos," an agent for a buyer named Abdullah Abdullah, approached Mahland in 1995 with an offer to buy THE CLARA P.Upon inspection, Marcos discovered that THE CLARA P.'s "slop" tanks contained a substance that smelled of gasoline.
This substance, referred to by the parties as "product," included water mixed with gasoline or some other hydrocarbon fluid.The parties disagree as to its precise composition.
On behalf of Abdullah, Marcos agreed to buy THE CLARA P. provided that the tank containing the product and the other storage compartments were cleaned.Mahland negotiated the agreement.It is unclear whether she did so as president of Poling Transportation or of Motor Vessel Poling Bros.
On August 17, 1995, Mahland told Frederick Carmant, a dispatcher for Poling Transportation, to arrange for THE CLARA P.'s slop tanks to be cleaned out.She and Carmant were both aware that THE CLARA P.'s onboard pumping system was inoperative.
At Mahland's suggestion, Carmant called several companies who provide pumping services in the harbor.When he told Mahland that none of the companies was available, Mahland told him to call Metro Fuel.She did not give specific instructions on how the boat was to be cleaned.
Carmant stated that Metro had often bought gasoline or fuel oil from Poling Transportation, and that a boat in Poling Transportation's fleet would typically transport the product to Metro Terminals where it would be offloaded.THE CLARA P. could not do this job because its internal pumps were inoperative and, apparently, it was not then authorized to travel upon navigable waters.
Carmant then called Joseph Squadrito, Metro's purchase and sales manager.Carmant claimed that he offered to give Metro the product on the Clara P. without charge if Metro would arrange have it offloaded from the barge and transported to Metro Terminal.Squadrito said Carmant offered to sell him gasoline, without mentioning that Metro Fuel needed to arrange for its transportation.
Squadrito came to the Poling Transportation yard on the morning of August 18, 1995 to obtain a sample of the product from THE CLARA P. Carmant, Mahland and Squadrito gave different versions of Squadrito's visit and of subsequent events.
In a deposition Squadrito testified in substance as follows.When he visited the Poling yard, Carmant told him that the product would have to be pumped off of the barge onto a truck prior to any delivery.Squadrito told Carmant that Metro Terminal could not receive fuel unless it was delivered by barge, and so probably could not accept the product.Carmant then asked Squadrito to recommend a company that could offload and transport the product to another location within the Poling Transportation yard.Squadrito said he suggested Ultimate Transportation and two other trucking companies.
Carmant's testimony was that Squadrito obtained a sample of the product and said he would have it tested and tell Carmant later that day whether Metro Fuel would accept it.Squadrito then left Poling's yard without discussing Ultimate.
Carmant said Squadrito called him early the same afternoon and said the product had been tested and found to be clean gasoline.Squadrito allegedly said also that Metro would accept the product.Carmant said he then told Squadrito that the product would have to be pumped off THE CLARA P. and then transported to Metro Terminal.It was Carmant's understanding that Metro Fuel would accept delivery at Metro Terminal, and would pay for the transportation.
Carmant also said he asked Squadrito how Poling should transport the product.Carmant said he told Squadrito that a "vacuum truck" was needed for the job.
Carmant gave conflicting testimony as to whether Squadrito instructed him to call Ultimate or simply recommended Ultimate as a potential transport company.Carmant said Squadrito characterized Ultimate as "our trucking company" or a company that Metro "had used ... before and were satisfied with."
Mahland was sitting next to Carmant when Squadrito called on the afternoon of August 18, 1995.Carmant said he told Mahland that Metro could accept the product via truck, and that Squadrito recommended Ultimate.Mahland corroborated this statement.
Jurgens was also present when Carmant spoke to Squadrito on the phone.He said it was his understanding that Metro agreed to accept the product and that "they would take it off that night."Specifically, he believed that Metro would supply a truck to offload and transport the product.
Squadrito admitted that he called Carmant, but said he did so only to confirm that Metro Fuel would not accept the product.Squadrito admitted knowing that Ultimate did not have vacuum trucks.
On the morning of August 18, Carmant told Jurgens to pump water from a different tank on THE CLARA P., using a portable hand pump stored on the Poling yard.He later told Jurgens to have the crew of THE ANTHONY J. help remove the product from the slop tanks, and said a vacuum truck would arrive later that day.
Carmant said that after the phone call with Squadrito, he called Ultimate and spoke to a secretary named Tina Henson.Carmant said he told Henson that Squadrito had recommended Ultimate, and asked whether Ultimate could provide a vacuum truck to remove gasoline...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Silivanch v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.
...common law principles of negligence apply. See Smith v. Mitlof, 130 F.Supp.2d 578, 582 (S.D.N.Y.2001); Jurgens v. Poling Transportation Corp., 113 F.Supp.2d 388, 396-97 (E.D.N.Y.2000); Diesel Tanker Ira S. Bushey, Inc. v. Tug Bruce A. McAllister, No. 92 Civ. 5559, 1994 WL 320328, at *6 (S.D......
-
Burke v. Quick Lift, Inc.
...Mitlof, 130 F.Supp.2d 578, 582 (S.D.N.Y.2001) ("The common law rules of negligence apply in admiralty law."); Jurgens v. Poling Transportation Corp., 113 F.Supp.2d 388, 396-97 (E.D.N.Y.2300) (same). Moreover, under general maritime law, a party may assert products liability tort claims base......
-
Nasik Breeding & Research Farm v. Merck & Co.
...information was incorrect or false, and that the plaintiff reasonably relied upon the information provided.'" Jurgens v. Poling Transp. Corp., 113 F.Supp.2d 388, 397 (E.D.N.Y.2000) (quoting Grammer v. Turits, 271 A.D.2d 644, 706 N.Y.S.2d 453 (2d Dep't 2000)). A plaintiff may not recover for......
-
In re Treanor
...708, 721 (2d Cir.1964) ). Courts also look to the law of New York for injuries that occur in its waters. Jurgens v. Poling Transp. Corp., 113 F.Supp.2d 388, 396–97 (E.D.N.Y.2000) (citing International Ore & Fertilizer Corp. v. SGS Control Services, Inc., 38 F.3d 1279, 1284 (2d Cir.1994) ). ......
-
John P. Figura, You're in the Army Now: Borrowed Servants, Dual Servants, and Torts Committed by Contractors' Employees in the Theaters of U.s. Military Operations
...neither adopted nor rejected [the control] test and find it unnecessary to do so today."). 24 Jurgens v. Poling Transp. Corp., 113 F. Supp. 2d 388, 403 (E.D.N.Y. 2000) (holding that a special employer must have "the power to control, manage, and direct the servant in the performance of [the......
-
Section 83 Criminal Penalties
...use in similar circumstances.” Id. at 1120 (citing Black’s Law Dictionary 1032 (6PthP ed. 1990)); cf. Jurgens v. Poling Transp. Corp., 113 F. Supp. 2d 388, 396 (E.D.N.Y. 2000) (negligent discharge was determined to constitute only a Class A misdemeanor). ...