In a maritime collision case on appeal, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1292(a)(3) jurisdiction was not limited to interlocutory appeals from orders disposing of all rights and liabilities asserted among all parties; the district court’s dismissals of all direct and third-party claims against manufacturer/shippers were unaffected by remaining counterclaims or cross-claims. As such, appellate court had interlocutory jurisdiction over the appeal.
Chem One, Ltd., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. M/V Rickmers Genoa, et. Al. Docket Nos. 10-4934-cv (L); 10-4965-cv (Con); No. 10-4938-cv, No. 10-4961-cv
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 21222
October 20, 2011, Decided
Plaintiffs, the owners and subrogated insurers of destroyed cargoes, filed four individual admiralty actions against various parties, including the owner/shipper of one potentially explosive cargo, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking damages for losses beyond the amounts paid in salvage. The district court, made various rulings on the parties’ summary judgment motions. The parties appealed.
In a maritime collision, one cargo was a reagent product that contained a large percentage of magnesium, which was susceptible to exploding when exposed to water, especially sea or salt water. The vessel holding that cargo flooded and an explosion and fire resulted in loss of cargo and a life. The manufacturer/shippers of the reagent moved to dismiss, claiming the appealed-from orders were non-final and that the appellate court lacked jurisdiction under the 28 U.S.C.S. § 1292(a)(3) admiralty interlocutory provision. The appellate court held that 28 U.S.C.S. § 1292(a)(3) was not limited to interlocutory appeals from orders disposing of all rights and liabilities asserted among all parties. The district court dismissed all direct and third-party claims against the manufacturer/shippers. Those determinations were unaffected by remaining counterclaims or cross-claims. The court could properly exercise jurisdiction over the appeals under § 1292(a)(3). Because the appeals arose from the same conjoined multiparty litigation in the district court, and consolidation would be both efficient and equitable for the disposition of the appeals the consolidation motion was granted.
The motion to dismiss was denied. The motion to consolidate was granted.
Tour operator’s two incident reports were not protected from disclosure by work product doctrine, as codified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3), in negligence action brought by a cruise ship passenger because the operator did not meet its burden of proving that primary motivating purpose behind writing incident reports was to aid in possible litigation.
JUNE BRIDGEWATER, Plaintiff, vs. CARNIVAL CORPORATION, RAPSODY TOURS, CHARTERS & CRUISE LIMITED, DREAMER CATAMARAN CRUISES and XYZ CORPORATION, Defendants.
CASE NO. 10-CV-22241-KING/MCALILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106786
September 20, 2011, Entered on Docket
In cruise ship passenger personal injury claim, based on injury sustained during a shore excursion, Defendant tour operator and Defendant cruise line claimed work product privilege regarding their incident reports.
The tour operator’s two incident reports were not protected from disclosure by the work product doctrine, as codified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3), in the negligence action brought by the cruise ship passenger. However, the cruise ship owner demonstrated that the primary purpose behind its accident report was to aid it in possible future litigation. The passenger’s argument, that contemporaneous reports of events would likely be more accurate than witnesses’ recollections years later, could be said in almost any lawsuit, and standing alone did not establish “substantial need.”
The passenger’s motion to compel discovery was granted as to the tour operator’s incident reports and emails between defendants. The motion was denied as to the cruise ship owner’s accident report, witness statements, and accident statements.