Medina v. Marvirazon Compania Naviera, S.A., 82-1530

• Decision Date: 13 June 1983
• Docket Number: No. 82-1530,82-1530
• Citation: 709 F.2d 124
• Parties: Floro Herrera MEDINA (Master), Sergio Aros, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees, v. MARVIRAZON COMPANIA NAVIERA, S.A., et al., Defendants, Appellees. Doctor Elias J. Tsavaris, Plaintiff, Intervenor Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

Page 124

709 F.2d 124

Floro Herrera MEDINA (Master), Sergio Aros, et al Plaintiffs, Appellees, v. MARVIRAZON COMPANIA NAVIERA, S.A., et al., Defendants, Appellees Doctor Elias J. Tsavaris, Plaintiff, Intervenor Appellant.

No. 82-1530.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 7, 1983.

Decided June 13, 1983.

Richard H. Wilson, and Wilson & Kenny, Boston, Mass., on brief, for plaintiff, intervenor appellant.

Michael F. Kuppens, and Kneeland, Kydd & Handy, Boston, Mass., on brief, for appellees Gulf Water Shipping Co., Inc., All Ships Supply, Inc., Hellas Ships Supply Co., Inc., Strachan Shipping Co., Boland Marine & Mfg. Co., Inc., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedoring, Inc., Dixie Mach. Welding & Metal Works, Inc., New Star Ship Supply Co., Inc., and Weber Marine, Inc.

James F. McHugh, S. Elaine McChesney, and Bingham, Dana & Gould, Boston, Mass., on brief, for appellee Nat. Sugar Refining Co.

Before CAMPBELL, BOWNES and BREYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The only issue in this case is whether the master was clearly erroneous in finding that appellant, Dr. Tsavaris, was not entitled to a seaman's wage lien against the vessel, M/V Constantinos. The district court, 533 F.Supp. 1279, affirmed the master's finding, as do we.

The law in this area is well-settled. Generally speaking, one who advances funds used to discharge seamen's wage liens is subrogated to the lienors' rights. Sasportes v. M/V Sol de Copacabana, 581 F.2d 1204, 1207 (5th Cir.1978); G. Gilmore & C Black, The Law of Admiralty Secs. 9-20, 9-21 (2d ed. 1975); 2 Benedict on Admiralty, Secs. 32, 33 (7th ed. 1982). Exceptions are that owners, general agents, and, in limited circumstances, shareholders or officers of a corporate owner have been denied liens. See The Gloucester, 285 F. 579, 582 (D.Mass.1923). Owners are denied liens as it is inequitable for those who are primarily liable for a debt to be reimbursed to the detriment of other lienholders out of the vessel's proceeds. Corporate officers, general managers, and others are denied liens when they have considerable authority over the vessel such that they are in a similar position to the owner and there would be "insuperable legal difficulties in the enforcement of [the lien], or because--on the grounds similar to estoppel--to recognize it would be inequitable to other claimants." Id. at 582.

The factual question is whether appellant, who advanced $51,844.40 that was used to pay the wages of the crew, occupied such a close relationship to the vessel and its owners and exercised sufficient control over the ship that it would be inequitable to grant him a lien. The record here supports the district court's conclusion that it would be. Appellant had been friendly for some years with Robert Fearon who, along with Peter Patten, controlled the corporations that owned and managed the vessel. Prior to advancing the $51,884.40, appellant had at the request of Fearon and Patten, advanced them $15,000 because they were having difficulties meeting crew payments. As with the $51,884.40, appellant received no acknowledgment of payment, outside of his cancelled check. Appellant testified that the $51,000 was his own money and money that he had borrowed from another doctor. According to appellant,...