Paradise Family, LLC v. Unknown Potential

CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedApril 26, 2024
Docket8:24-cv-00181
StatusUnknown

This text of Paradise Family, LLC v. Unknown Potential (Paradise Family, LLC v. Unknown Potential) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Paradise Family, LLC v. Unknown Potential, (M.D. Fla. 2024).

Opinion

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA IN ADMIRALTY Case No. 24-cv-00181-WFJ-AEP

IN THE MATTER OF: PARADISE FAMILY, LLC, as owner and ANOTHER Day IN PARADISE BOAT CLUB, LLC, d/b/a FREEDOM BOAT CLUB OF TAMPA BAY as owner pro hac vice of the Reel Traction, a 2020 Cobia motor vessel bearing hull identification number CBACX011G920 and _ Florida Registration FL9040SL, together with its Engine, Tackle, Appurtenances, Equipment, & Etc., in a cause for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, Petitioners.

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONERS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF EXONERATION AGAINST ALL PERSONS AND ENTITIES WHO DID NOT RESPOND THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Final Default Judgment of Exoneration Against all Persons and Entities who did not respond to the Petition for Exoneration or Limitation. This case involves an admiralty complaint for exoneration from or limitation of liability pursuant to the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act, 46 U.S.C. §§ 30501, et seg., and Rule F of the Supplemental Admiralty and Maritime Claim Rules. (See □□□ _1). Because Petitioners complied with the relevant statutory and procedural rules, the Court grants the motion.

I. Background In the Complaint for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, the

Petitioners Paradise Family, LLC, as owner and Another Day In Paradise Boat Club, LLC, d/b/a Freedom Boat Club of Tampa Bay as owner pro hac vice of the Reel Traction, requested that this Court notice all persons, firm or corporations asserting claims for any and all losses, damages, injuries or

destruction with respect to the Petitioners’ claim and order such parties to file their respective claims with the Clerk of this Court. (ECF 1). Moreover, as relevant here, the Petitioner also sought a judgment that Petitioners, the [v]essel, and its owners, masters, crew, employees, and agents, are not liable

whatsoever for any losses, damages, injuries, or destruction, or for any claim whatsoever done, occasioned or incurred as the result of the incent described in the Petition. (ECF 1). Following the filing of the complaint, Petitioner also filed its Ad Interim Stipulation of Value and Stipulation for Costs. (ECF 5).

And on January 23, 2024, the Court entered its Order Approving Ad Interim Stipulation of Value, Directing Notice to all Persons Asserting Claims, ordering any claimants to file their respective claims with the Clerk of Court and file an answer to the complaint by March 15, 2024. (ECF 8). At that time,

the Court also ordered that public notice of the Monition be given by publication as required by Rule F of the Supplemental Admiralty and Maritime Claim Rules. Id. Then, in accordance with the Order, a Monition was issued (ECF 10) directing all persons or corporations, in respect of which the Petitioners seek limitation, to file their respective claims with the Clerk of this

Court and to serve on or mail to the Petitioners’ attorneys copies thereof on or before March 15, 2024, and citing such claimants to appear and respond to the Complaint herein or be defaulted. Petitioners filed proof of publication including an affidavit thereof

showing publication of the Monition in Tampa Bay Times, a daily newspaper printed and published in Pinellas County, Florida, on February 4, 11, 18, and 25, 2024. See ECF 12-1, Proof of Publication. And on January 29, 2024, Petitioner sent the Complaint, Order

Approving the Ad Interim Stipulation and for monition and injunction, and the Monition, to all potential claimants. See ECF 11, Notice of Filing Proof of Service. No one has requested additional time to respond. And only Elisia Rogers appeared, answered, and made a claim. See ECF 13.

A Clerk’s Default was entered as to all who failed to appear, answer, or otherwise plead to the complaint. See ECF 17, Clerk’s Default. Notably, to date, no new claimants have appeared or moved to set aside the Clerk’s entry of default. Thus, Petitioners now request the Court enter a final default

judgment as to all non-filing claimants. II. Legal Standard Pursuant to the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act, 46 U.S.C. §§

30501, et seq., a shipowner can limit its liability for certain claims involving its vessel to the value of the vessel. See Orion Marine Constr., Inc. v. Carroll, 918 F.3d 1323, 1325 (11th Cir. 2019) (“The Act establishes a procedure by which a shipowner can limit its liability for certain claims involving one of its vessels

to the value of the vessel plus its then-pending freight.”) (citing § 30505(a)). See also Rule F of the Local Admiralty and Maritime Rules. III. Discussion Here, based on a review of the record, the Petitioners complied with the

relevant rules. Aside from the claim listed above, no other parties have responded, answered and/or filed claims within the prescribed deadline as set. Nor have there been any requests for more time to file a claim. And to date, no claimants have appeared or moved to set aside the Clerk’s entry of default. See

In re Vass, No. 17-cv-81031, 2018 WL 11229125, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2018) (“Where publication is made according to the rules and practice in admiralty proceedings, it becomes notice to all persons having any claims, whether they received actual notice thereof or not, and if they fail to appear within the time

designated, they are liable to lose the opportunity of presenting their claims in that proceeding or in any other.”) (citing Dowdell v. U.S. Dist. Court for N. Dist. Of Cal., 139 F. 444, 445-46 (9th Cir. 1905)). As Petitioners complied with the applicable Rules, the Court finds that an entry of default final judgment as to the non-appearing claimants is

appropriate. See Matter of Newport Freedog, No. 18-cv-647-T-23AEP, 2018 WL 3687986, at *2 (M.D. Fla. July 16, 2018) (recommending that motion for default judgment against non-filing claimants be granted as plaintiffs satisfied their obligations under Supplemental Rule F(4), which included the publication of

notice in the Tampa Bay Times for four consecutive weeks, with the notice indicating the deadline to file a claim or answer); see also In re Vass, 2018 WL 11229125, at *2 (granting petitioner’s motion for entry of final default judgment for exoneration of liability as to non-claimants where the petitioner

complied with admiralty rules). And see In re Fun Time Boat Rental & Storage, LLC, 431 F. Supp. 2d 993, 1002 (D. Ariz. 2006) (holding that Petitioner was entitled to exoneration when claimant failed to properly file a claim.); Matter of Charles E. Collier, No. 3:20-cv-119-BJD-PDB, Docket Entry 59 (M.D. Fla.

July 9, 2021) (granting petitioner’s motion for entry of final default judgment for exoneration of liability as to an individual, insurance company, and any and all claimants who failed to plead or otherwise defend any claim concerning the subject loss); Matter of Mark A. Beauvios, No. 2:10-cv-480-CEH-SPC,

Docket Entry 41 (M.D. Fla. Jan 7, 2011) (directing the clerk of court to enter a final default judgment decreeing that the limitation plaintiff is exonerated from all liability for any and all losses, personal injury and/or death related to the subject vessel collision); In re Sause Bros. Ocean Towing, No. Civ. 89-609- RE, 1992 WL 220674, at *2 n.1 (D. Or. Feb. 25, 1992) (denying claimants’

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

Related

Miller v. United States
78 U.S. 268 (Supreme Court, 1871)
Orion Marine Construction, Inc. v. Mark Dawson
918 F.3d 1323 (Eleventh Circuit, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Paradise Family, LLC v. Unknown Potential, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paradise-family-llc-v-unknown-potential-flmd-2024.