Skip to main content

Maritime Law--South Florida Lawsuit Filed in El Faro Sinking


 The first South Florida lawsuit against the owner of EL FARO, the cargo ship that sunk in Hurricane Joaquin last month, was filed on October 28, 2015 in Broward County Circuit Court. This latest lawsuit claims EL FARO's engine failure and loss of power on October 1st followed many years of lax maintenance. The lawsuit also claims EL FARO was not seaworthy in that the ship was undergoing "significant maintenance" just before it left port September 29th and had a history of losing power.

The lawsuit was brought by the widow of Anthony Thomas who seeks damages for herself and for the couple's five children, ages 8 to 29. The lawsuit states the Fort Lauderdale court has jurisdiction because Tote Maritime's registered agent is in Plantation.
 

 
This lawsuit is the fourth complaint brought against ship owner Tote Maritime since the deaths of EL FARO's 33 crew members. This latest lawsuit comes just as the Jacksonville-based company seeks to prevent future lawsuits and limit the damages victims' families can collect by virtue of their filing of a limitation of liability lawsuit.

In the limitation of liability lawsuit filed by the shipowner, Tote Maritime claimed it should not be required to pay more than about $15.2 million in total damages for losses related to the shipwreck found near Crooked Island in the Bahamas. The company claims its liability is limited under the limitation of liability act to a death claims fund of $420 per gross registered ton, or $13.2 million, with another $2 million for the freight aboard the ship. The company also asked U.S. District Judge Brian J. Davis to issue an injunction against the prosecution of future lawsuits.

The Broward County lawsuit was removed to federal court and has been assigned to U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch. However, because there are two similar lawsuits filed in Jacksonville, one in federal court and one in Duval Circuit Court and because wrongful death claims cannot proceed until the limitation court has resolved the limitation action, it is likely that Tote Maritime will move to consolidate all the actions in Jacksonville.
 
According to this latest complaint, the U.S. Coast Guard documented 23 deficiencies with EL FARO Faro since 2003. The 40-year-old ship also allegedly lost power and propulsion during a 2011 voyage due to faulty equipment.
 
If you are interested in receiving a copy of the latest lawsuit or in contacting me, you may do so by writing to me at blog@miamimaritimelaw.co.

 

 

Comments

  1. It's really a nice and helpful piece of information. I'm glad that you shared this helpful info with us. Please keep us informed like this.
    Shipping estimates

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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--Lozman Case Revisited in Miami?

In Hoefling v. City of Miami , Case no.: 14-12482 (11th Cir. Jan. 25, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit revived almost all of Hoefling's claims. You ask, "Who is Hoefling?" Hoefling  lived on his sailboat Metis O moored off Dinner Key for nearly a decade—until the day he came home and it was gone. About three months earlier, an officer from the Miami Police Department's Marine Patrol Detail tagged Hoefling's vessel for lacking a sanitary device and a working anchor light. He had a deal to use the facilities at the nearby marina but quickly went out and reportedly bought what he needed to comply. Three months later while he was on a business trip, the City of Miami seized and destroyed his boat and all his belongings. As a result, he was homeless. He sued under § 1983, maritime law, and state law. He stated a claim under the Fourth Amendment for seizure and destruction without notice or cause and a “taking.”    At the ...

Maritime Law--Novel Rule B Attachment Rejected by Eleventh Circuit

In World Wide Supply OU v. Quail Cruises Ship Management , Case No. 14-14838 (11th Cir. Sept. 30, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s order vacating an attachment of legal settlement funds.  At issue in this appeal was an attachment of property made pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule B. This appeal had a complicated background, involving multiple lawsuits in federal district courts, Florida state court, and a Spanish bankruptcy court. The common denominator of these suits was Quail Cruises Ship Management, from which multiple parties, including participants in the appeal, tried to collect money that they believed Quail owed them. This is not surprising, as there have been numerous cases against Quail due to a failed cruise venture they operated. The money at issue arose from the legal settlement of a dispute over the purchase of a cruise ship featured on ABC Television Network’s long-running series, The Love Boat. The ...