An Odyssean Voyage Comes to an End
Neptune Shipmanagement Servs. Pte v. Dahiya, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29672 *, 2021 WL 4486397 (5th Cir. Oct. 1, 2021).
Odysseus’s voyage home after the Trojan War compared to this litigation, lasted a mere ten years before he returned to Ithaca and his faithful wife, Penelope, and son, Telemachus. The litigation voyage of Vinod Kumar Dahiya bests the legendary voyage of the eponymous hero by more than double and lingered in various tribunals on two continents before finally coming to an end. This litigation traveled from state court in Louisiana to U.S. federal court, back to state district court for trial[1], and to India and back again to Louisiana state court before finally coming to an end in federal court.
Mr. Dahiya was severely burned on M/T EAGLE in late 1999 in international waters off the coast of Louisiana and evacuated from the vessel to be treated for his injuries in a hospital in Baton Rouge, La.[2] He filed suit in Louisiana state court after he recovered from his injuries. But, the “vessel interests”[3] removed the action to federal court under the New York Convention[4] to compel arbitration which was denied by the district court.[5] The state trial court awarded $579,000.[6] On appeal, the state appellate court reversed and ordered arbitration.[7] On remand, the trial court stayed the suit against all “vessel interests” and ordered arbitration in India where it lingered.[8] Finally, an award was finally issued in his favor in 2020 for the equivalent of $130,000.[9]
Despite offers to pay the award, Mr. Dahiya sought to reinstate the prior judgment of $579,000.[10] This suit was removed to federal court.[11] With an award in hand, the “vessel interests” also filed suit in federal court to confirm the award pursuant to the New York Convention as well as to enjoin the claimant from any further litigation.[12] The trial court granted Summary Judgment for the “vessel interests” to confirm the award in the amount of $300,580, enjoined any further litigation and closed the removed state court suit.[13]
The claimant appealed the confirmation of the arbitral award only.[14] He argued, among other things, that federal court lost jurisdiction when it remanded the first state suit, that the arbitration clause is unenforceable and even if it is enforceable as to Neptune, it is not enforceable as to the other parties which did not sign the contract of employment.[15]
His arguments failed on all counts. The remand of the initial state court suit was a different suit. Here, the action was a new suit to confirm the arbitral award issued in India.[16] In addition, because the order to remand was unappealable, it has no preclusive effect.[17] However, the judgment of the state appellate court does have preclusive effect which addresses his arguments that the arbitration provision is unenforceable and does not prevent pursuing a suit against other parties than Neptune.[18] These arguments were made before the Louisiana court of appeal and were dismissed; the state court of appeal reversed the judgment of the state trial court and remanded with orders to compel arbitration as to all “vessel interests.”[19] This is a final ruling as to enforceability of the arbitration agreement.[20] He failed to name the other “vessel interests” in the arbitration; as such he failed to prosecute his claim against them.[21] The arbitration award is final as to all parties.[22]
A copy of the opinion may be found following this link:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-30776-CV0.pdf
AAC
[1] The state court awarded $579,000. 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29672 *4
[2] 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29672 at *3
[3] The “vessel interests” are: Neptune Shipmanagement Services, the crewing agency and employer, Talmidge International, owner of the vessel, American Eagle Tankers, bareboat charterer, and Britannia Steam Ship Insurance Association, the insurer.
[4] Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 9 U.S.C. § 205
[5] The trial court denied the motion to compel arbitration on the basis that it contravened the public policy of Louisiana and remanded the case to state court. An appeal was denied by the Fifth Circuit as remand orders are non-appealable. 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29672 at *3-4
[6] 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29672 at *4
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Id. at *5
[11] Id.
[12] Id.
[13] Id. at *6 The sum included accrued interest.
[14] He did not appeal the removal of the state court suit. Id.
[15] Id. at *6-7
[16] Id. at *8
[17] Id. at *10
[18] Id. at *11
[19] Id. at *14
[20] Id.
[21] Id. at *16
[22] Id.
