AFAMILIONA FA'ATASIGA, Plaintiff
v.
THE
M/V OCEAN
INTEROCEAN SHIPS, Inc., and Estate of JOHN
Defendants in personam
In the Matter of the
Complaint of INTEROCEAN SHIPS, Inc.,
Owner and Operator of the M/V "OCEAN
for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability
Trial
Division
CA No. 152-83
CA No. 43-84
May 6, 1991
__________
The
The High Court's general admiralty jurisdiction includes limiting a shipowner's liability to the value or the ship, although lacking the statutory power of federal district courts to enforce this principle by injunction, pending the outcome or the limitation proceeding.
Th High Court refused to approve parties' stipulation to lift a stay or an action in federal district court when no such stay was issued because of the lack of statutory authority to do so.
Before REES, Associate Justice.
Counsel: For Plaintiff, Roy J.D. Hall and Paul F. Cronin
For Defendant Interocean Ships, Inc., William H. Reardon, William L. Banning, and Stephen T. Erb
For Defendant Estate of John Medina, Charles V. Ala'ilima and Charles Schoemaker, Jr.
The first of the two above-captioned actions, CA No. 152-83, was a personal-injury action filed in 1983 and dismissed in 1988. (The dismissal was technically for lack of prosecution, but it appears from the [19ASR2d60] file of the other action, CA No.43-84, that a settlement in CA No. 152-83 had been reached in 1986.)
The second action, CA No.43-84, arose out of a
petition by
The Court bas now received a request for approval
of a stipulation in what appears to be a related case, Lulley v. M/V Ocean Pearl, Case No. 86-189-CIV-T-17, in the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The stipulation represents
that the
The High Court's file in the above-captioned
cases, however , reflects no order staying the
Because there is no stay for this Court to lift, the requested approval of the proposed stipulation would be without any apparent legal or practical effect.
*********