Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. O/S DOROTHY CLAIRE, Civ. A. No. B-89-00245-CA.
Decision Date | 21 December 1989 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. B-89-00245-CA. |
Citation | 732 F. Supp. 59 |
Parties | WESTINGHOUSE CREDIT CORPORATION v. O/S DOROTHY CLAIRE ON 559486; O/S TRAVELER ON 552463; Their engines, tackle, apparel, etc., in rem. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas |
Joann M. Dahl, Westinghouse Credit Corp., Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
Christopher L. Evans, Meyers, Orlando & Evans, Houston, Tex., for intervenor.
This motion is before the court requesting summary judgment as to the priority of the movant's first preferred ship mortgage on two vessels, O/S DOROTHY CLAIRE and O/S TRAVELER, including their engines, tackle, and apparel.
On September 8, 1989, Anderson Petroleum Transportation Co., Inc., ("Anderson Petroleum"), as owner of the DOROTHY CLAIRE and TRAVELER, granted to Westinghouse Credit Corporation a first preferred ship mortgage on the whole of the DOROTHY CLAIRE and TRAVELER to secure a loan in the original principal amount of $1,709,500.00. The relevant documents indicate this mortgage was recorded with the United States Coast Guard Vessel Documentation Office in Houston, Texas, on September 9, 1981. The mortgage particulars were endorsed on the documents of the vessels on the same date.
On July 12, 1987, Anderson Petroleum executed and delivered to Westinghouse a renewal promissory note in the amount of $498,727.83 and an Amendment and Extension of the First Preferred Ship Mortgage, in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 922. The amendment and extension was recorded at the United States Coast Guard Vessel Documentation Office in Houston, Texas, on February 2, 1988, and was duly endorsed on the documents of the vessels. The amendment and extension recites that it is given in renewal and extension of the preferred ship mortgage dated September 8, 1981.
Intervenor Coastal Iron Works, Inc. ("Coastal Iron") has intervened in this cause to assert a preferred ship mortgage covering the DOROTHY CLAIRE and TRAVELER executed on June 14, 1983, and recorded at the Coast Guard on July 15, 1983, which is after recordation and endorsement of plaintiff's preferred ship mortgage with the Coast Guard.
Intervenor Anchor Engine Service, Inc. ("Anchor Engine") has intervened in this case to assert maritime liens for necessaries supplied to the vessels. Such necessaries were provided to the vessels in 1985, 1986, and 1987, after recordation and endorsement of plaintiff's mortgage with the Coast Guard.
Plaintiff's mortgage on the oil screws DOROTHY CLAIRE and TRAVELER, their engines, tackle, apparel, etc., is in full compliance with the requirements of the Ship Mortgage Act, 1920, as amended, 46 U.S.C. § 911, et seq., (the "Act")1 Under the provisions of 46 U.S.C. § 922, a valid mortgage on the whole of any vessel of the United States shall have the preferred status give by the provisions of 46 U.S.C. § 953 if:
After reviewing all of the relevant documents and affidavits, including the affidavit of the supervisor of the Vessel Documentation Section, U.S. Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, it is clear plaintiff's mortgage satisfies all the requirements of 46 U.S.C. § 922 set forth above. The mortgage covers the whole of the oil screws DOROTHY CLAIRE and TRAVELER.
The recording by the Coast Guard of a document as a first preferred ship mortgage gives rise to a presumption of regularity which in the absence of other evidence is sufficient to establish the mortgage's validity. State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. SEA FREEZE, 1981 A.M.C. 2001, 2003-04 (E.D.Va.1979).
Intervenor Coastal Iron Works claims its mortgage has priority over all other claims on the vessels. In support of this claim, Coastal contends that the Coast Guard Abstracts of Title of the DOROTHY CLAIRE and the TRAVELER indicate the plaintiff's mortgage was discharged, for reasons unknown, on September 10, 1988. In response, the plaintiff has directed the court's attention to the affidavit of the supervisor of the vessel documentation section of the U.S. Coast Guard, Houston, Texas. The affidavit states that there is nothing on either vessel's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Alakai
...mortgages is generally determined based on the timing of recordation with the Coast Guard. See, e.g., Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. O/S Dorothy Claire, 732 F.Supp. 59, 61 (E.D.Tex.1989). It is remarkable that the Coast Guard recorded the mortgages at the exact same moment, but the record is ......
-
U.S. v. 1215902)
...mortgages is generally determined based on the timing of recordation with the Coast Guard. See, e.g., Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. O/S Dorothy Claire, 732 F.Supp. 59, 61 (E.D.Tex.1989). It is remarkable that the Coast Guard recorded the mortgages and their supplements at the exact same mome......
-
Bollinger Shipyards Lockport LLC v. Queen
...of regularity which in absence of other evidence is sufficient to establish the mortgage's validity." Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. O/S DOROTHY CLAIRE, 732 F. Supp. 59, 61 (E.D. Tex. 1989) (citing State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. SEA FREEZE, 1981 A.M.C. 2001, 2003-04 (E.D. Va. 1979)). The Co......
-
In re Good Ship Appledore, Ltd.
...Coast Guard and, therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, its validity is established. Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. O/S Dorothy Claire, 732 F.Supp. 59, 61 (E.D.Tex.1989). 26 Pierside Terminal Operators, Inc. v. M/V Floridian, 374 F.Supp. 27, 30 (E.D.Va.1974) Rev'd on other gro......