Certain Underwriters at Lloyds v. Kenco Marine Terminal, Inc.

Good Law
81 F.3d 871·96 Daily Journal DAR 4335·1996 WL 172861·1996 A.M.C. 1422·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7714
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 15, 1996No. 93-36019California910 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Kenco Marine Terminal, Inc. appeals from an order of the district court allocating equally between Kenco and Certain Underwriters at Lloyds (“Lloyds”) the costs of maintaining in custodia legis a vessel arrested by Lloyds, and later rearrested by Kenco, for satisfaction of maritime hens. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and, because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

On March 8,1993, Lloyds filed a complaint in rem against the M/V Garnet Banks in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleging torts by the vessel’s owners against a vessel insured by Lloyds, claiming a maritime hen against the M/V Garnet Banks, and seeking damages of over •SSljOOO. 1 The complaint also sought an in rem warrant of arrest for the M/V Garnet Banks. The following day a warrant of arrest issued and the court appointed a custodian to substitute for the U.S. Marshal, and on March 10 the vessel was arrested by the U.S. Marshal at Kenco Marine Terminal, where it had been moored since November 1992.

On April 27, 1993, the court allowed Kenco to intervene on its claimed maritime hen against the M/V Garnet…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.