L.B. Harvey Marine, Inc. v. M/V River Arc, 82-5793

Citation1984 A.M.C. 1588,712 F.2d 458
Decision Date15 August 1983
Docket NumberNo. 82-5793,82-5793
PartiesL.B. HARVEY MARINE, INC., A Fla. Corp., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M/V "RIVER ARC" in rem, Her Engines, Tackle, Furnishings, and other Appurtenances, and Owners, Defendants-Appellees. Non-Argument Calendar.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)

Lane, Mitchell & Harris, P.A., C. Robert Murray, Jr., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

Dixon, Dixon, Hurst & Nicklaus, James A. Dixon, Jr., Miami, Fla., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Before GODBOLD, Chief Judge, FAY and CLARK, Circuit Judges.


Harvey filed a complaint in rem against M/V RIVER ARC, alleging an unpaid balance for equipment installed and services performed on the vessel, and claiming a maritime lien. The district court issued a warrant of arrest in rem. Following a post-seizure hearing the district court dissolved the warrant of arrest. Harvey filed a notice of appeal but did not request a stay of the order dissolving the arrest nor did it file a supersedeas bond.

It appeared from the briefs that the RIVER ARC was scheduled to sail from the Port of Miami on the day the district court entered its order dissolving the arrest warrant. Since nothing in the record or briefs indicated that the vessel did not sail as planned, this court directed the parties to file briefs on the issue of whether the appeal should be dismissed as moot because the vessel had left the jurisdiction of the court. The parties have filed their briefs, and while there is no specific stipulation both acknowledge that the vessel did depart from the jurisdiction.

The appeal must be dismissed as moot. In a maritime case, where the res is no longer before the court, its in rem jurisdiction is destroyed, and any appeal from its decision is moot. Taylor v. Tracor Marine, Inc., 683 F.2d 1361, 1362 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 1252, 75 L.Ed.2d 481 (1983). The presence of the res within a court's territorial jurisdiction is necessary before the court can proceed to adjudication. Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure Sec. 1063, at 203, Sec. 1070, at 270. Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Unidentified Wrecked and Abandoned Sailing Vessel (Treasure Salvors I), 569 F.2d 330 (5th Cir.1978), involved a shipwreck located partly inside and partly outside of the district court's territorial jurisdiction. The parties had consented to the district court's exercise of in rem jurisdiction. It was physically impossible to bring the extraterritorial part of the wreck inside the court's jurisdiction, and the district court had done what it could to seize the remainder of the res. In Treasure Salvors III, 640 F.2d 560 (5th Cir.1981), we noted that the district court in Treasure Salvors I had in personam federal question jurisdiction over the claimants. Therefore, it was not necessary to rely on in rem jurisdiction over the absent res because the parties had submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the court by consent. 640 F.2d at 566.

A consent to transfer jurisdiction to another district court under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1404(a) may suffice to permit a transferee forum to exercise in rem jurisdiction even though the res is not located within the district's territorial jurisdiction. Continental Grain Co. v. Barge FBL-585, 364 U.S. 19, 21-24, 80 S.Ct. 1470, 1472-74, 4 L.Ed.2d 1540, (19...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Odyssey Marine v. Unidentified, Shipwrecked Vessel, Case No.: 8:07-cv-614-T-23MAP.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • December 22, 2009
    ...her jurisdictional mooring line to this district has been severed. In rem jurisdiction no longer exists. L.B. Harvey Marine, Inc. v. M/V River Arc, 712 F.2d 458, 459 (11th Cir.1983) ("where the res is no longer before the court, its in rem jurisdiction is destroyed" (citation omitted)); Tay......
  • U.S. v. Four Parcels of Real Property in Greene and Tuscaloosa Counties in State of Ala.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • August 29, 1991
    ...also United States v. One (1) 1983 Homemade Vessel Named "Barracuda," 858 F.2d 643, 647 (11th Cir.1988); L.B. Harvey Marine, Inc. v. M/V "River Arc," 712 F.2d 458, 459 (11th Cir.1983). Daniel argues, however, that when the district court released the dozer from custody, we lost in rem juris......
  • U.S. v. One Lear Jet Aircraft, Serial No. 35A-280, Registration No. YN-BVO
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • February 11, 1988
    ...the court's power derives entirely from its control over the defendant res. Id. at 272, 37 S.Ct. at 283; L.B. Harvey Marine, Inc. v. M/V River Arc, 712 F.2d 458, 459 (11th Cir.1983). Where an appellant fails to file a stay of judgment or a supersedeas bond, and the res is removed from the c......
  • Minott v. Brunello, 18-10374
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • June 6, 2018
    ...court, ... in rem jurisdiction is destroyed" and the district court "can[not] proceed to adjudication," L.B. Harvey Marine, Inc. v. M/V River Arc , 712 F.2d 458, 459 (11th Cir. 1983) (italics added). The Supreme Court highlighted this concern in Swift & Co. Packers v. Compania Colombiana de......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chapter § 3.02 CRUISE SHIPS
    • United States
    • Full Court Press Travel Law
    • Invalid date
    ...problem with in rem actions is that should the ship depart, jurisdiction comes to an end. See L.B. Harvey Maine, Inc. v. M/V "River Arc," 712 F.2d 458 (11th Cir. 1983). The unavailability of jury trials is one of the arguments against the enforement of a Federal forum selection clause in cr......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT