Dune Energy v.

Frogco Amphibious 2013 US District Court ED Louisin

Overall. This is a request for summary judgement and court finds that the determination of
whether "buggy excavator is a vessel is fact disputable"
Parties. Dun.e Energy !"#inti$$%-Owner of the land and have oil transfer pipe but are getting
canal dredged next to transfer line. !une is the responsible party and has paid for the cleanup
costs. !une is trying to get "#O$O to pay them for the removal costs "subrogation". !u%e is
arguing that because they are suing "#O$O under subrogration they are not entitled to all of the
rights as if they were a responsible party.
"#O$O &!efendant' - (s the subcontractor of )agnolia and while assisting with the dredging
they hit the oil transfer. *' They are trying to limit their liability via limit liability act but have to
prove the bac% hoe meets the definition of a vessel.
+nalysis. "#O$O is eligible to limit their liability but this depends on whether the "buggy
excavator" is found to be a vessel.
"acts. Oil spill in Pass, -outra .ational /ildlife #efuge on land owned by Plaintiff !une 0nergy.
Dune Energy c#ims tht on December 2&' 2010' F()*C)+s mphibious bc, hoe' #so
,no-n s mrsh buggy e.cvtor' cuse/ /mge to Dune Energy+s trns$er #ine' -hich
h/ ##ege/#y been c#er#y mr,e/ by surveyor' n/ cuse/ oi# to #e, into the
surroun/ing -ters.
-imiting -iability. "#O$1O argues that its liability should be limited to 2the greater of 3456 per
gross ton of the )arsh 7uggy 0xcavator or 38666669 which is the amount set out in : ;<6=&a'
&;' for 2any other vessel9 that is not a tan% vessel. Asserts tht it is e#igib#e s mtter o$ #-
$or #imit on #ibi#ity un/er the )i# "o##ution Act. Id. 0 2102.
Common-e#th o$ "uerto (ico v. 345 Emi#y
)ver##. 1ommonwealth of Puerto #ico is trying to collect damages under OP+ and charters etc.
see% exoneration or limitation of liability from limitation of liability act and other acts preceeding
the OP+. 1ommon wealth of Puerto #ico wins...
Fcts. wire between the tug )>? 0)(-@ A and the barge )O##(A B. 70#)+. parted
grounding the barge off of Punta 0scambrCn Aan Buan Puerto #ico. The grounding caused much
of the )O##(A B. 70#)+.Ds cargo of fuel oil to spill into the waters of the 1ommonwealth of
Puerto #ico
6ssue. 0ffect of OP+ on -imitation +ct and Other legislation
)etlife argues that the OP+ does not eviscerate preexisting limitaton procedure and it remains
available. OP+ limits the previous -imitation -iability act.
)etlife also wants the government...
+nalysis. 1ourt loo%s at OP+ and determine that it basically repeals -imitation -iability +ct and
previous acts in terms of damages and procedurally. 1ourt also says that several %ey provisions of
the statutes are inconsistent.
6n re Frescti Shipping Co v. Citgo "etro#eum 2012 US Court Appe#s 3
r/
Circuit
s$e berth -rrnty - is an express assurance of safety
PartiesE "rescati &Owner F operator' Ahipping 1ompany G #esponsible Party- *86
million -88 G4; million
$overnment - reimbured 88 million - government steps in Page *6 because of
OP+Hs limitation of liability. +ct encourage the ship owner to ta%e care of it right
away and they will be reimbursed later...
1itgo - !oc% owner refiner
"rescati and government want 1itgo to pay for the 3*86 millon because they are
the ones possible responsible.
IThere
Tan%er was within its final 2approach9 when it struc% submerged anchorJ and
recovery for damage to oil tan%er could not be based on a negligent
misrepresentation by marine terminal owner about the ship doc%.
The government reimbursed "rescati the owners of the boats etc. 88 million of the
*86 million of cleanup costs. .ow "rescati and KA government are going after
1(T$O "the marine terminal owner" for safe berth warranty of not being aware
the anchor was in the channel...
The shipowner brought a claim arguing that the terminal had an absolute duty to provide not only
a safe beerth byt also the pproachesto it. The court determined that the definitionof approach that
owners urgedthe court to adoptwas unreasonably expansive.
+ charterHs party safe berth clause dos not ma%e acharter the warrantor of the safety of a berth.
Lundereds of vessels passed over the anchors location without any accident and owners were
sufficently familiar with the port as they called it *= times on previous occasions.
$eneral .egligence. !uty to loo% for obstructions breach causation
#are case where the ship was not negligent because they were being pushed into their berth.
The court also found that the government had no statutory or regulatory duty to scanthe anchrage
for haMards to navigation.
+pproach is limited to an area between the docl and upriver channel.
!ue dilligence sholdbe be the prevailing standard of care.The provisionsof the safe port
claisereaquirecharters to use duedilligence inselecting the berth and do notrelieve the master
ofhisdutytonavigate the vessel safely
6n re )i# Spi## 7y 8he )i# (ig 2010 92012 US District Court ED Louisin
+ mobile offshore drilling unit &)O!K'
US Americ v. Egn 3rine Corp 2011 US Dist :.D. 6##inois
Overall. 1ase is trying to determine if what level of limitation of liability we apply via OP+.
There is no gross negligence so the level of liability is limited. 1ase also loo%s at the type of
vessel to limit liability. "inally the court loo%s at civil liability... and determines that there is no
gross negligence...
"acts. The barge 0)1 =;N exploded on the 1hicago Aanitary and Ahip 1anal &the 21anal9' near
the 1icero +venue 7ridge. (t was being transported by the tugboat -isa 0. which is owned by
0gan )arine 1orporatio. (t was carrying a load of 1larified Alurry Oil. the explosion caused oil
and oil solids to lea% into the canal. 0)1 employee +lex Oliva &2Oliva9' was on board the bargeJ
he died.
$overnment. claims such costsOmostly removal costs and compensation that the
.P"1 has paid to harmed third parties. The $overnment see%s to recapture those
costs as well as to obtain civil penalties.
0)1. OP+ however also contains a limitation of liability for responsible parties
who are not grossly negligent and do not cause the oil spill by their own unsafe
actions.