Dahl Tug & Barge Inc v. Cashman Equipment Corporation

MEMORANDUM

Cashman Equipment Corporation (“Cashman”) appeals the award of out standing charter fees and interest that the district court found Cashman incurred from April 16, 2009 to May 26, 2009. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of the case, we repeat them here only as necessary to explain our decision. We affirm.

The fees were incurred by Cashman pursuant to Cashman’s charter of the vessel Triton from Dahl Tug. The contract called for Cashman to pay $6,000 for each day the vessel was “on hire.” The vessel was delayed in port in Amelia, Louisiana while the parties negotiated for the sale of the vessel and then delayed again while Dahl prepared the vessel to leave port after the purchase negotiations ended. The district court found that these interruptions in service “were not caused solely by Dahl’s fault” and therefore did not relieve Cashman of its obligation to pay hire.

This court “review[s] de novo an admiralty court’s conclusions of law, and review[s] for clear error an admiralty court’s findings of fact.” Crowley Marine Servs., Inc. v. Maritrans, Inc., 530 F.3d 1169, 1173 (9th Cir.2008) (internal citations omitted). On clear error, we will reverse only if…