11th Circuit Affirms Judgment For Stevedores

A $3.5 million jury verdict against Miami-Dade County and a declaration that a county ordinance regulating stevedores was unconstitutional were affirmed Friday morning by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The decision means that Florida Transportation Service Inc., which complained it was unfairly denied a permit to operate at the Port of Miami in 2003, 2004 and 2005, will collect a total $4 million in damages from the county.

"The permitting practices did not further, but if anything rather disserved, the county's purported purposes and benefits," said the opinion by U.S. Circuit Judge Frank Hull, Senior Judge Emmett Ripley Cox and U.S. District Judge Donald Walter of Louisiana sitting by designation.

U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan (who now sits in the Eleventh Circuit) in Miami ruled in 2008 that the ordinance on stevedores interfered with interstate commerce. Jordan ruled the county ordinance guaranteed work for the nine existing stevedore companies but kept others out.

Judge Adalberto Jordan
Picture Obtained from Daily Business Review Dec. 28, 2012

The appellate court's 83-page opinion "demonstrates without question that Judge Jordan correctly analyzed the legal issues and that the county's conduct in protecting existing stevedores from outside competition violated the U.S. Constitution," said Coffey Burlington partner Jeffrey Crockett, who represented Florida Transportation.

Florida Transportation, a non-union company, first attempted to obtain a permit in 1999 and finally received one for 2011 after prevailing at the 2010 jury trial. A key piece of evidence at the 10-day trial was a letter from the Southeast Florida Employers Port Association to the port saying that giving a new company a permit would result in "destructive competition."

The Southeast Florida Employers Port Association represents nine unionized companies whose workers belong to the International Longshoremen's Association.

The appellate court's opinion is 83 pages long. It essentially agreed with Judge Jordan that the county's conduct in protecting existing stevedores from outside competition violated the U.S. Constitution. If you are interested in receiving a copy of the decision or wish to reach me, you may do so by email at mov@chaloslaw.com.

Comments

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector. The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl

Maritime Law--U.S. Crewmember Required to Arbitrate Claims Applying Norwegian Law

In Alberts v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd ., No. 15-14775 (11th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a U.S. citizen, working aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship is required to arbitrate his claims against Royal Caribbean. Plaintiff, a United States citizen, worked as the lead trumpeter on a passenger Royal Caribbean cruise ship. The ship is a Bahamian flagged vessel with a home port in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Royal Caribbean, the operator of the vessel, is a Liberian corporation with its principal place of business in Florida. After plaintiff became ill while working for Royal Caribbean, he filed suit alleging unseaworthiness, negligence, negligence under the Jones Act, maintenance and cure, and seaman’s wages and penalties. Royal Caribbean moved to compel arbitration, and the district court granted the motion. This appeal presented an issue of first impression: Whether a seaman’s work in international waters on a cruise ship

Maritime Law--Jury Hits Royal Caribbean Cruises With $20.3M Verdict for Officer's Hand Injury

In Spearman v. Royal Caribbean Cruises , Case No. 2011-023730-CA-01, a Miami-Dade County, Florida jury has awarded $20.3 million to a former crewmember of Royal Caribbean Cruises, whose hand was crushed while coming to the aid of a fellow worker during an emergency test in 2008. After a three-week trial, the jury found the Miami-based cruise company negligent in operating an unseaworthy ship and 100 percent liable for the injuries suffered by Lisa Spearman, who was working an officer on Royal Caribbean’s Voyager of the Seas . Spearman sued the company in 2011, three years after her right hand was caught in a watertight power door during a fire-safety drill. According to her lawyers, Spearman was trying to prevent the door from closing on the ship’s nurse when her hand was pulled into a recess pocket of the sliding door and crushed. The nurse allegedly breached the company’s safety protocol when she stumbled through the door, prompting the response from Spearman. Accordin

Miami Shipping Law

Search This Blog