Star & Crescent Boat Co. v. Sunsplash Marina LLC (In re Complaint of Star & Crescent Boat Co.)
| Decision Date | 16 April 2021 |
| Docket Number | Case No.: 3:21-cv-00169-BEN-JLB |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of California |
| Parties | In the matter of the Complaint of STAR & CRESCENT BOAT COMPANY, INC., as owner of the Motor Vessel M/V PATRIOT, U.S. Coast Guard Official No. 1246882, and her engines, equipment, tackle, apparel, appurtenances, etc., for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, STAR & CRESCENT BOAT COMPANY, INC. dba FLAGSHIP CRUISES & EVENTS Plaintiff, v. SUNSPLASH MARINA LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company; OCEANROCKETS, INC., a New Jersey Corporation; YANK MARINE INC., a New Jersey Corporation; H.O. BOSTROM COMPANY, INC., a Wisconsin Corporation; SEATBELTPLANET.COM, LLC, an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 10, Defendants. |
Plaintiff in Limitation STAR & CRESCENT BOAT COMPANY, INC., dba FLAGSHIP CRUISES & EVENTS ("Plaintiff in Limitation" or the "Vessel Owner"), as owner of the Motor Vessel PATRIOT, U.S. Coast Guard Official No. 124682, and her engines, equipment, tackle, apparel, appurtenances, etc. (the "Vessel"), brings this admiralty action pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 30501 et seq., the Shipowners' Limitation of Liability Act (the "Limitation Act"), for exoneration from or limitation of liability against Defendants SUNSPLASH MARINA LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company ("Sunsplash Marina"); OCEANROCKETS, INC., a New Jersey Corporation ("Oceanrockets"); YANK MARINE INC., a New Jersey Corporation ("Yank Marine"); H.O. BOSTROM COMPANY, INC., a Wisconsin Corporation ("H.O. Bostrom"); and SEATBELTPLANET.COM, LLC, an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company ("Sealbeltplanet.com") (collectively, "Defendants"). Compl., ECF No. 1 at 2.1
Before the Court is Plaintiff in Limitation's (1) Amended Ad Interim Stipulation for Value and Costs, ECF No. 8; (2) Letter of Undertaking, ECF No. 8-1; (3) Application for Injunction and Monition,2 ECF No. 8-2; (4) Amended Ex Parte Application for Entry of Injunction and Monition, ECF No. 8-3; and (5) Notice of Complaint for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, ECF No. 8-5. Party-in-Interest and Claimant Jade Spurr ("Ms. Spurr") specially appeared to oppose. Opposition, ECF No. 9 ("Oppo."). Plaintiff in Limitation replied. Reply, ECF No. 10 ("Reply").
After considering the papers submitted, supporting documentation, and applicable law, the Court (1) accepts Plaintiff in Limitation's Stipulation for Value and Costs and Letter of Undertaking as sufficient security; (2) enjoins all proceedings arising out of the Incident, as defined below, giving rise to this limitation action; and (3) directs the Clerk of the Court to issue notice out of and under the seal of this Court.
On or about December 18, 2012, Defendant Sunsplash Marina entered into a contract with Plaintiff in Limitation for the construction of the Vessel. ECF No. 1 at 5, ¶ 17. Defendants Sunsplash Marina, Oceanrockets, and Yank Marine worked on the design and construction of the Vessel (collectively, "Builder Defendants")." Id. at 5, ¶ 17. Defendants H.O. Bostrom and Sealbeltplanet.com manufactured and supplied Builder Defendants with the passenger seats and seatbelt equipment, which Builder Defendants installed on board the Vessel. ECF No. 1 at 5, ¶ 18, 8, ¶ 35. Plaintiff in Limitation alleges that it did not replace the seatbelts or passenger seats on board prior to the incident. Id. at 7-8, ¶ 34.
On August 5, 2018, Ms. Spurr boarded the Vessel for a regularly scheduled jet boat tour of the San Diego Bay. ECF No. 1 at 5, ¶ 19. She alleges that, during a high-speed turning maneuver, her safety belt became undone, and she hit her head on a metal railing attached to the Vessel adjacent to her seat (the "Incident"). Id. Plaintiff in Limitation alleges that the value of its interest in the Vessel, at the end of the voyage giving rise to the Incident was no more than $775,000.00. Id. at 6, ¶ 27.
On October 8, 2018, Ms. Spurr's counsel first sent written notice to Plaintiff in Limitation, stating nothing more than that he would be representing Ms. Spurr regarding the Incident. See Exhibit "A" to Declaration of William S. Leonard ("Leonard Decl."), ECF No. 9-4 at 4; Oppo. at 5:13-15. On October 18, 2018, Plaintiff in Limitation responded, requesting all documentation of Ms. Spurr's alleged injuries; the information for all witnesses to support her claim for damages and liability; and a copy of the video of the incident. Exhibit "B" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 6; Oppo. at 5:15-19. On December 12, 2018, Ms. Spurr's counsel responded to this request in a letter, enclosing a video recording of the voyage. Exhibit "C" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 6; Oppo. at 5:20-22.
On April 4, 2019, Ms. Spurr's counsel re-sent the same letter previously sent on December 12, 2018. Exhibit "D" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 10; Oppo. at 5:20-22. The following day, on April 5, 2019, Ms. Spurr's counsel sent a fourth letter to Plaintiff in Limitation, enclosing a March 28, 2019 report from Ms. Spurr's neurologist, Mahyar Okhovat, M.D., which diagnosed Ms. Spurr with a diffuse traumatic brain injury ("TBI"). Exhibit "E" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 12; Oppo. at 5:22-6:2.
On April 25, 2019, Plaintiff in Limitation responded, explicitly requesting, inter alia, "[a]ll medical records and bills." Exhibit "F" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 14.
On May 2, 2019, Ms. Spurr's counsel sent another letter to Plaintiff in Limitation, enclosing additional medical records from Ms. Spurr. Exhibit "G" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 16; Oppo. at 6:3-12. This letter stated, "There is insufficient billing to send to you at this time and upon our receipt, bills will be sent to your attention." Id. The letter also responded to Plaintiff in Limitation's request for a list of witnesses but still did not provide any information as to the amount of damages Ms. Spurr was seeking. Id.
On May 14, 2019, Plaintiff in Limitation responded, noting that Ms. Spurr's medical records showed she had sustained previous concussions, and as such, Plaintiff in Limitation requested additional medical records and reiterated its request for Ms. Spurr's medical bills. Exhibit "H" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 18.
On July 31, 2020, Ms. Spurr filed a Complaint for damages in San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2020-00026937-CU-PO-CTL, alleging "traumatic brain injuries and other serious personal injury" as a result of the Incident (the "State Court Action"). ECF No. 1 at 5, ¶ 20. As of the date of the filing of the complaint in this case, no other lawsuits have been filed by any other person or entity related to the Incident. Id. at 5, ¶ 21. That same day, Ms. Spurr also gave Plaintiff in Limitation notice of her lawsuit. Id. at 6, ¶ 27.
On January 28, 2021, or within six months of Ms. Spurr's State Court Action, Plaintiff in Limitation filed this action for exoneration of limitation of liability for damages for (1) strict liability, (2) indemnity, and (3) contribution. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff inLimitation's complaint, inter alia, asks the Court to (1) accept its appraised value of $775,000.00 as the value of the Vessel; (2) enjoin further prosecution of any actions relating to the Vessel; (3) approve the security offered by Plaintiff in Limitation; (4) adjudge that Plaintiff in Limitation is not liable; (5) limit liability, as requested, to the value of the Vessel at the conclusion of the voyage if Plaintiff in Limitation is adjudged liable; (6) hold Defendants liable in products liability for any injuries and damage; (7) order Defendants to indemnify Plaintiff in Limitation for any injuries and damage; (8) order Defendants to contribute to any liability of Plaintiff in Limitation for any injuries and damages; (9) dismiss with prejudice any claims Ms. Spurr may file; and (10) order that if Ms. Spurr is entitled to recover, she may only recover against Defendants. ECF No. 1 at 9-10, ¶¶ 1-10.
Although the summons issued on January 29, 2021, Plaintiff in Limitation has not filed a proof of service indicating any of the defendants have been served. See ECF No. 3. However, on January 29, 2021, Plaintiff filed the original (1) Ad Interim Stipulation for Value and Costs, ECF No. 4; (2) Letter of Undertaking, ECF No. 4-1; (3) Application for Injunction and Monition, ECF No. 4-2; and (4) Notice of Complaint for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, ECF No. 5. However, for the Court to issue an injunction, the security provided must be "equal to the value of the owner's interest in the vessel and pending freight, or approved security." 46 U.S.C. § 30511(b); FED. R. CIV. P., Supp. R. F(1). The Complaint, ECF No. 1 at 6, ¶ 27, Kells Christian Declaration, ECF No. 1-3 at ¶ 6, and Stipulation, ECF No. 4 at 2:14-21, all referenced the Vessel as having a value of $775,000.00, but the Letter of Undertaking only undertook an obligation of $750,000.00, ECF No. 4-1 at 3. Thus, on February 16, 2021, the Court denied Plaintiff in Limitation's requests because the Stipulation and Letter of Undertaking provided insufficient security. ECF No. 6.
On February 2, 2021, Ms. Spurr's counsel sent a meet and confer letter to Plaintiff in Limitation regarding Ms. Spurr's contention that the subject complaint-in-limitation is timebarred. Declaration of Christopher Edgington, ECF No. 9-3 at 2, ¶ 2; Exhibit "I" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 20.
On February 9, 2021, Plaintiff in Limitation responded advising that even though the correspondence from Ms. Spurr's counsel provided notice that she had an actual claim, it did not provide notice that the claim might exceed the value of the vessel. Exhibit "J" to Leonard Decl., ECF No. 9-4 at 23-24. This letter...
To continue reading
Request your trial