Payne v. SS Tropic Breeze

293 F. Supp. 425, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9987
CourtDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico
DecidedOctober 15, 1968
DocketCiv. No. 453-67
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 293 F. Supp. 425 (Payne v. SS Tropic Breeze) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Payne v. SS Tropic Breeze, 293 F. Supp. 425, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9987 (prd 1968).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

CANCIO, Chief Judge.

The claim of intervenor, Apostólos Samadjapoulos, Master of the SS Tropic Breeze, came up for hearing before this Court on March 8, 1968 for the purpose [426]*426of determining the amount that he is entitled to recover under the complaint filed by him on August 15, 1967. The defendant, a vessel of Liberian registry, arrived in San Juan, Puerto Rico, on or about June 26, 1967 for routine drydocking. Some days after its arrival, the crew members demanded their wages due, but the Master, due to the owner’s failure to provide the necessary funds, was unable to pay them. After stores and supplies had been exhausted and the crew were compelled to endure several days without food, an action in rem was filed by them on July 3, 1966.

The Master, nonetheless, endeavored to raise sufficient funds to pay and feed the crew and release the vessel. He requested money from the charterer but the latter refused to make any advance. He then traveled to New York attempting to get money from the owner. His efforts were unsuccessful and when he realized the hopelessness of the situation, he filed an intervening complaint claiming wages, advances and traveling expenses. Several other parties also intervened in the proceedings claiming maritime liens on the defendant vessel. One of those lienors, National Western Life Insurance Company, Inc., hereinafter referred to as “National” claimed to have a first preferred mortgage lien on the SS Tropic Breeze, which claim was eventually allowed by order of this Court on January 12, 1968.

Because the owners of the vessel did not file a claim, release the vessel and answer the complaint as required by Rules C and E of the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims, the Court on September 29, 1967, upon petition of all parties before the Court at the time, ordered the sale of the SS Tropic Breeze.1 An amended order for the sale of the vessel was subsequently filed and entered on October 4, 1967. The sale would have been consummated in accordance therewith and the proceeds of the sale deposited in the registry of the Court had it not been for a petition by National, in which all other parties joined through a stipulation dated November 1, 1967. Said stipulation provided for National to deposit into the registry of the Court the aggregate amount of all claims that the Court would find to have priority over its claim as mortgagee and to make such deposit within five days after the Court’s determination.

Eventually, the mortgagee was permitted to purchase the vessel by bidding the balance due on its mortgage and agreeing to pay all claims that have priority over said mortgage. Said sale was confirmed on January 11, 1968. In other words, National is required to pay according to its stipulation and the order of Confirmation of Sale those claims for maritime liens which the Court finds to have priority over its claim as mortgagee.

As a result of the foregoing, National has objected to and defended against the claims of all other lienors intervening in this case, including that of Apostólos Samadjapoulos. It first objected to the latter’s intervention alleging that he did not have a maritime lien for wages and traveling expenses. The objection was denied and the intervention allowed as to all his claims by an order dated September 26, 1967. Payne et als. v. SS Tropic Breeze, 274 F.Supp. 324, 328 (D.P.R. 1967).

On March 8, 1968, the Court heard the Captain’s testimony as to all the matters alleged in the complaint. Documentary evidence consisting of numerous disbursement receipts and the monthly statements of account of the vessel’s income and expenses were produced and admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits 1 to 8, inclusive. Each of these exhibits represent the monthly flow of the vessel’s funds beginning in November of 1966 and ending in June of 1967.

These exhibits together with the Master’s General Accounts, (Exhibits 1 and 2 at hearing of claim for crew’s wages), are the basis for his claim of advances, [427]*427which, in effect, is a claim for the difference or balance in his favor at the end of the period from an “open account”.

He also testified as to his wage claim and other expenses he had to incur as a result of an order of this Court dated after the vessel was under custodia, legis.

National was the only party opposing all the Master’s claims but its opposition consisted solely of cross-examining him. Although at its request the Court continued the hearing for a later date in order to allow it an opportunity to further cross-exam the witness and to produce proof contrary to his claim, no such proof was ever brought to the Court’s attention. On the contrary, it appears from a Stipulation dated April 2, 1968, that National has waived further cross-examination of Captain Samadjapoulos, and admitted the authenticity of certain additional documents which he had brought from New York and which would have been offered in evidence at the hearing, which further substantiate his claim for advances. These documents have also been considered by the Court, as no objection to their admissibility has been advanced by National.

The Court thereafter granted National several more opportunities for bringing a witness from New York and even for taking his deposition in lieu of his testimony in Court, but it failed to produce that witness’ testimony. Finally, the Master’s claim was taken under advisement pending the filing of memoranda of law on his right to a maritime lien for advances and on the issue of priorities. His lien for wages and traveling expenses were allowed with priority by the order of September 26, 1967, and his lien for advances and disbursements is allowed by the order filed simultaneously with this judgement.

In view of the foregoing orders all of the Master’s claims have been allowed, with priority over the mortgage, as a matter of law. Now, after hearing the Master’s uncontradicted testimony and reviewing the documentary evidence on record, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Apostólos Samadjapoulos, the intervening plaintiff, is a citizen of the United States of America and a resident of the State of New York. At all times relevant herein he was employed as Captain of the defendant vessel.

2. The SS Tropic Breeze, the defendant, is a vessel flying the flag of the Republic of Liberia and subject to the laws of that country.

3. The intervenor, National Western Life Insurance Co., Inc., is at all times pertinent herein, the holder of a promissory note, secured by a first preferred mortgage on the SS Tropic Breeze, which mortgage was duly executed and registered in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Liberia.

4. Captain Samadjapoulos was employed at New York City in late October 1966 and assumed command of the vessel on November 1, 1966. As Master of the vessel he had several duties and responsibilities, among which was his responsibility for the safety and health of the crew and for the vessel’s funds and disbursements therefrom. Every month the owner would provide him with funds, from which he would pay for all of the expenses necessary to maintain the vessel in operation, including crew’s wages, food, supplies, stores, repairs and many other necessaries. At the end of each month he would prepare an account of all the funds received and of all expenditures, in the form of debits and credits.

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

Related

European-American Banking Corp. v. M/S ROSARIA
486 F. Supp. 245 (S.D. Mississippi, 1979)
Payne v. Ss Tropic Breeze
423 F.2d 236 (First Circuit, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
293 F. Supp. 425, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-ss-tropic-breeze-prd-1968.