-
261 F.2d 861·
5th Cir.·
1958-11-21
·cited 96×
The court held that the intervenor's claim for a maritime lien was improperly denied without a hearing, as the facts did not establish waiver or laches as a matter of law.
-
793 F.2d 598·
5th Cir.·
1986-04-25
·cited 33×
The court held that a supplier of insurance premiums is entitled to a maritime lien under the Maritime Lien Act, but that this specific supplier waived its lien by relying on the credit of the vessel owner and related entities rather than the vessel itself.
-
724 F.2d 1161·
5th Cir.·
1984-02-13
·cited 27×
A foreign in personam action, even if secured by an undertaking, is not the equivalent of a U.S. in rem action for purposes of the lis alibis pendens doctrine.
-
423 F.2d 236·
1st Cir.·
1970-03-11
·cited 24×
The court held that the Master's claims for post-arrest expenses and travel to secure funds were superior to the mortgage, but claims for wages, double wages, and disbursements were subordinate.
-
808 F.2d 697·
9th Cir.·
1987-01-20
·cited 20×
The court held that cargo containers leased to a fleet manager were not "furnished" to a particular vessel under the Federal Maritime Lien Act, thus no lien attached to that vessel.
-
805 F.2d 561·
5th Cir.·
1986-12-09
·cited 6×
A parent corporation cannot insulate its vessel from maritime liens by transferring title to a wholly-owned subsidiary and taking back a sham mortgage, even if statutory procedures are followed.
-
363 F.2d 352·
5th Cir.·
1966-07-18
·cited 6×
The court held that a charter-party clause assigning the risk and expense of loading to the charterer does not explicitly deny the charterer's authority to create a maritime lien against the vessel.
-
310 F.2d 547·
6th Cir.·
1962-12-08
·cited 6×
Federal courts have admiralty jurisdiction to enforce state-created liens for marine insurance premiums, even if federal law does not provide such a lien.
-
859 F.2d 1405·
9th Cir.·
1988-10-25
·cited 5×
The court held that a supplier of necessaries to a vessel is entitled to a maritime lien under the Federal Maritime Lien Act, even with 'no lien' clauses in charter agreements, unless the supplier had actual knowledge of those clauses.
-
756 F.2d 357·
5th Cir.·
1985-04-01
·cited 5×
-
375 F.2d 586·
4th Cir.·
1967-03-13
·cited 4×
A stevedore is not entitled to a maritime lien when charter parties, read together, provide sufficient notice that the lien is unauthorized, even if the subcharter itself does not explicitly prohibit it.
-
712 F. Supp. 1542·
S.D. Fla.·
1989-03-22
·cited 3×
The court held that Swedish law applied to the in rem claim, and under Swedish law, the plaintiff was not entitled to a maritime lien; the court also held that the defendant was a bona fide purchaser for value regarding the in personam conversion claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-11
The court granted summary judgment for breach of maritime contract and foreclosure of maritime lien, and entered default against a business entity that failed to obtain counsel.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-09-04
The court recommended granting in part and denying in part the motion for default final judgment, finding the plaintiff established a maritime lien for necessaries and custodia legis services, and recommending an award of damages, costs, and sale of the vessel.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-18
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for relief from judgment, finding no basis for mistake, newly discovered evidence, or other extraordinary circumstances to alter the prior judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-26
The court held that the buyer materially breached the preferred ship's mortgage and promissory note by wiring the final payment to a fraudster, and this fraud did not excuse the breach.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-03-20
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on claims for foreclosure of a maritime lien and breach of contract.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-29
The court granted summary judgment for Rybovich's custodia legis expenses and necessaries claim, and partially granted the Crew's claim for necessaries, but denied summary judgment for some of Thornburn's claimed necessaries due to insufficient evidence.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-12-26
The court granted the motion to strike the defendant's response and denied the defendant's motion to implement the mailbox rule, finding the defendant failed to comply with procedural rules and deadlines.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-11-14
The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient grounds for the vessel's arrest, and set a security amount for its release, while denying the request for countersecurity.