Aadland v. Boat Santa Rita II, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts
DecidedOctober 16, 2020
Docket1:17-cv-11248
StatusUnknown

This text of Aadland v. Boat Santa Rita II, Inc. (Aadland v. Boat Santa Rita II, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Aadland v. Boat Santa Rita II, Inc., (D. Mass. 2020).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS _________________________________________ ) MAGNUS AADLAND, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 17-cv-11248-DJC ) BOAT SANTA RITA II, INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

CASPER, J. October 15, 2020

I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Magnus Aadland (“Aadland”) alleges that Defendant Boat Santa Rita II, Inc. (“BSR II”) breached its duty to provide maintenance and is liable for punitive damages for failing to do so (Counts III and IV, respectively). After a three-day bench trial, the Court now issues its findings of facts and conclusions of law on the claims against BSR II and enters judgment for BSR II on the remaining claims. II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Aadland instituted this action against Defendants BSR II, Boat Santa Rita III, Inc., F/V Linda, Francis A. Patania and Salvatore Patania, Jr. (collectively, “Defendants”), asserting various claims. D. 1. Aadland voluntarily dismissed F/V Linda. D. 10. The remaining Defendants moved for summary judgment on all remaining counts except for Count III. D. 53. The Court allowed Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to all claims except the punitive damages claim (Count IV). D. 63. Accordingly, the only defendant that remained for the bench trial was 1 BSR II on Count III, the maintenance and cure claim, and Count IV, the punitive damages claim for failure to pay maintenance and cure. D. 63. At the bench trial that began on September 14, 2020, D. 110-11, 113, the Court heard from three witnesses, Aadland, Cynthia Aadland (“Mrs. Aadland”), Plaintiff’s wife, and Francis Patania (“Patania”), the owner of BSR II.

III. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Aadland was, at all relevant times, the captain of the commercial fishing vessel, the F/V Linda. 2. BSR II was, at all relevant times, the sole owner of the F/V Linda. 3. Patania is the manager and co-owner of BSR II.

4. On July 9, 2014, the F/V Linda left New Bedford with a five-person crew captained by Aadland. 5. On or about July 12 or 13, 2014, a few days into the trip, Aadland fell ill while in the service of the F/V Linda. 6. By July 16, 2014, Aadland was unable to get out of his bunk on the F/V Linda.

7. At Aadland’s direction, Tommy Olival, the first mate on the F/V Linda, took control of the vessel and returned to New Bedford. 8. Patania was contacted about Aadland’s illness before the vessel returned to New Bedford. 9. Upon the F/V Linda’s return to New Bedford on July 18, 2014, an ambulance and Mrs. Aadland met the vessel at the dock and Aadland was taken to St. Luke’s

2 Hospital. 10. Aadland’s blood cultures taken at the hospital tested positive for group G Streptococcus bacteria.

11. The extent and cause of Aadland’s illness was not initially clear, but it required extensive hospitalization and treatment. 12. Aadland was hospitalized at multiple medical facilities for an extended period, from July 18, 2014 to December 29, 2014 and then again from July 9, 2015 to September 10, 2015. 13. During these hospitalizations, Aadland had to have multiple surgeries including a

cardiac surgery on December 5, 2015 and a second cardiac surgery in July 2015. 14. Aadland received Tufts health insurance (“Tufts”) through the employer, GAF Engineering, of his wife, Mrs. Aadland, from July 18, 2014 through September 2014. 15. Mrs. Aadland stopped working at GAF Engineering in September 2014. 16. From October 2014 through April 2017, Aadland was covered by a Tufts COBRA health insurance plan.

17. Although the Aadlands sometimes disagreed with Tufts about some of the treatment facilities during his hospitalizations in 2014 and 2015, there was no evidence that Aadland required any medical treatment that he did not receive. 18. In April 2017, Aadland obtained health care coverage through Medicare. 19. While Aadland was hospitalized between July 18, 2014 and December 29, 2014,

Defendant did not provide any maintenance, which at $84.00 per day, would have 3 totaled $13,860. 20. Based upon expense information, including mortgage, utilities, food, health insurance premiums and auto insurance expenses, gathered from Aadlands in

November 2014 and January 2015 by BSR II’s insurance broker, David DuBois of Maritime Claims Associates, LLC, BSR II decided to pay Aadland $84 per day in maintenance and $114 per day in advances. 21. Since February 5, 2015 (and retroactive to December 30, 2014), BSR II has provided Aadland maintenance at the daily rate of $84.00, including when he was hospitalized from July 6, 2015 to September 10, 2015. 22. BSR II has paid Aadland a total of $175,644.00 in maintenance.

23. Since February 5, 2015, Defendant has paid advances to Aadland at a daily rate of $114.00. These advance payments total $238,374.00. 24. Aadland has not repaid any of those advances. 25. Aadland’s ten-year history of earnings averaged $186,000 per year or approximately $509.58 per day.

26. Retroactive to December 30, 2014, between maintenance of $84/day and advances of $114/day, Aadland has received $198/day from BSR II. 27. The first of the maintenance and advance checks were delivered to Aadland by DuBois on behalf of BSR II on February 5, 2015. 28. The Aadlands used the maintenance and advance payments to pay household bills including but not limited to health insurance premiums.

4 29. BSR has also paid Aadland $5,388.24 in reimbursement for out-of-pocket medical expenses. 30. Aadland never submitted any other claims for out-of-pocket expenses to BSR II.

31. Throughout his hospitalization, Mrs. Aadland was in regular communication with Patania about Aadland’s condition. They began communicating by text when Patania texted her on the morning of July 18, 2014 to inquire about Aadland’s condition. 32. Patania visited Aadland several times during his hospitalization. 33. Patania was aware that Tufts was paying for Aadland’s medical treatment.

34. Although there were numerous setbacks in Aadland’s health, there were no indications to Patania or BSR II that he was not receiving reasonable and adequate medical care. 35. In fact, Aadland expected to return to work as early as spring of 2015. 36. There was no expense or bill related to Aadland’s medical care that was presented to BSR II that was refused.

37. Although as a vessel owner, Patania had encountered claims from seamen before, this instance was the first time that he had a seaman whose medical bills were paid by a private insurer. 38. Tufts has accepted $400,000.00 from BSR II in full satisfaction of any lien or claim it might have against Aadland or Mrs. Aadland for coverage of Aadland’s medical expenses.

5 39. No other insurer or treatment provider has presented any claim for reimbursement or payment of Aadland’s medical expenses. 40. Aadland has not presented any evidence of any unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical

expenses. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. “Maintenance is intended to cover the reasonable costs the seaman incurs in acquiring food and lodging ashore during the period of his illness or disability.” see Harper v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 741 F.2d 87, 91 (5th Cir. 1984) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 2. A shipowner is not required to pay maintenance unless “the seaman is outside the hospital and has not reached the point of ‘maximum cure.’” See Nichols v. Barwick, 792 F.2d 1520, 1523 (11th Cir. 1986) (citing Pelotto v. L & N Towing Co., 604 F.2d 396, 400 (5th Cir. 1979)).

3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Johnson v. United States
333 U.S. 46 (Supreme Court, 1948)
Vaughan v. Atkinson
369 U.S. 527 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Earl E. Robinson v. Pocahontas, Inc.
477 F.2d 1048 (First Circuit, 1973)
Glynn J. Pelotto v. L & N Towing Company
604 F.2d 396 (Fifth Circuit, 1979)
Lee D. Harper v. Zapata Off-Shore Company
741 F.2d 87 (Fifth Circuit, 1984)
George Barnes v. Andover Company, L.P.
900 F.2d 630 (Third Circuit, 1990)
Saco v. Tug Tucana Corp.
483 F. Supp. 2d 88 (D. Massachusetts, 2007)
Silva v. F/V Silver Fox LLC
988 F. Supp. 2d 94 (D. Massachusetts, 2013)
Hunt v. Trawler Brighton, Inc.
102 F. Supp. 300 (D. Massachusetts, 1952)
Gauthier v. Crosby Marine Service, Inc.
752 F.2d 1085 (Fifth Circuit, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Aadland v. Boat Santa Rita II, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aadland-v-boat-santa-rita-ii-inc-mad-2020.