Allen v. Friedline

Duval County Circuit Court

Allen v. Friedline

1 Fla. Supp. 2d 132

CourtCircuit Court of the 4th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Duval County

DecidedAugust 6, 1982

DocketNo. 81-13943-CA

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Fla. Supp. 2d 132 (Allen v. Friedline) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court of the 4th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Duval County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Allen v. Friedline, 1 Fla. Supp. 2d 132 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

JOHN E. SANTORA, Circuit Judge.

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint and to strike portions of the complaint.

The complaint seeks damages pursuant to the provisions of §786.16 et seq., Florida Statutes, for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s decedent arising out of a motorboat accident in the St. Johns River in Jacksonville. It is alleged in the complaint that the motorboat was owned by defendant David P. Friedline, that it was being operated at the time of the accident by defendant Roger James Friedline, and that the plaintiff’s decedent was in the motorboat at the time of an allision with the Main Street Bridge in Jacksonville.

Even though the accident out of which this case arose occurred on navigable waters, the “saving to suitors” clause in 28 U.S.C. §1333 preserves to the plaintiff the right to institute his action in state court for damages arising from a maritime tort. See Rountree v. A.P. Moller Steamship Co., 218 So.2d 771 (Fla., 1st D.C.A., 1969). It is maritime law, however, not state law, that is the substantive law applied in maritime torts accruing on navigable waters in this country, irrespective of whether the action is brought in a state or federal court. See Rountree, supra; Cashell v. Hart, 143 So.2d 559 (Fla., 2d D.C.A., 1962); Still v. Dixon, 337 So.2d 1033 (Fla., 2d D.C.A., 1976); Booth Steamship Co., Ltd. v. Calzada, 382 So.2d 425 (Fla., 3d D.C.A., 1980).

In 1970 the Supreme Court of the United States created a new cause of action for wrongful death under the general maritime law. Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 26 L.Ed 2d 339 (1970). Before Moragne, the admiralty law recognized state-created causes of action. Since Moragne, however, the wrongful death remedy under the general maritime law precludes recognition in admiralty of state wrongful death statutes. See Matter of S/S HELENA, 529 F.2d 744 (5th Cir., 1976).

It is, therefore,

ORDERED:

1. The motion of defendants to dismiss the complaint is granted.

2. Plaintiff is allowed twenty (20) days within which to file an amended complaint setting forth his cause of action under the general maritime law.

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

JOHN E. SANTORA, Circuit Judge.

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint and to strike portions of the complaint.

The complaint seeks damages pursuant to the provisions of §786.16 et seq., Florida Statutes, for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s decedent arising out of a motorboat accident in the St. Johns River in Jacksonville. It is alleged in the complaint that the motorboat was owned by defendant David P. Friedline, that it was being operated at the time of the accident by defendant Roger James Friedline, and that the plaintiff’s decedent was in the motorboat at the time of an allision with the Main Street Bridge in Jacksonville.

Even though the accident out of which this case arose occurred on navigable waters, the “saving to suitors” clause in 28 U.S.C. §1333 preserves to the plaintiff the right to institute his action in state court for damages arising from a maritime tort. See Rountree v. A.P. Moller Steamship Co., 218 So.2d 771 (Fla., 1st D.C.A., 1969). It is maritime law, however, not state law, that is the substantive law applied in maritime torts accruing on navigable waters in this country, irrespective of whether the action is brought in a state or federal court. See Rountree, supra; Cashell v. Hart, 143 So.2d 559 (Fla., 2d D.C.A., 1962); Still v. Dixon, 337 So.2d 1033 (Fla., 2d D.C.A., 1976); Booth Steamship Co., Ltd. v. Calzada, 382 So.2d 425 (Fla., 3d D.C.A., 1980).

In 1970 the Supreme Court of the United States created a new cause of action for wrongful death under the general maritime law. Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc., 398 U.S. 375, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 26 L.Ed 2d 339 (1970). Before Moragne, the admiralty law recognized state-created causes of action. Since Moragne, however, the wrongful death remedy under the general maritime law precludes recognition in admiralty of state wrongful death statutes. See Matter of S/S HELENA, 529 F.2d 744 (5th Cir., 1976).

It is, therefore,

ORDERED:

1. The motion of defendants to dismiss the complaint is granted.

2. Plaintiff is allowed twenty (20) days within which to file an amended complaint setting forth his cause of action under the general maritime law.

In the Matter of the Complaint of Sincere Navigation Corporation, as Owner of the S/s Helena, for Exoneration From or Limitation of Liability and the Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association, Ltd. Sincere Navigation Corporation and the Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association, Ltd. v. United States of America, Virginia O'quinn, Individually and as Administratrix of the Succession of Walton E. O'Quinn and Natural Tutrix of the Minor, Cathleen Caprice O'quinn, Cross-Appellant v. The Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association, Ltd., Cross-Appellees. United States of America, Cross-Appellant v. S/s Helena, Her Engines, Etc., in Rem and Sincere Navigation Corporation, Cross-Appellees

529 F.2d 744 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)

Rountree v. AP Moller Steamship Company

218 So. 2d 771 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)

Cashell v. Hart

143 So. 2d 559 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)

Still v. Dixon

337 So. 2d 1033 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)

Booth Steamship Co. v. Calzada

382 So. 2d 425 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Fla. Supp. 2d 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-friedline-flacirct4duv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack