Court Sanctions Defense for Attempted Removal Asserting Only Admiralty Jurisdiction

Cox v. Lippus, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212047 *, 2021 WL 5103803 (N.D. Oh. Nov. 3, 2021).

Another district court has joined the many other federal district courts, if not unanimous then nearly so, which have held that despite the 2011 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), a maritime claim filed in state court cannot be removed based solely on admiralty jurisdiction. 

Judge James Knepp, II of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio granted sanctions for costs and attorney’s fees against defendants for attempting to remove a wrongful death and survival claim from state to federal court asserting solely admiralty jurisdiction. The suit was filed by the administrator of the estate of the decedent who drowned when he fell from a boat owned by the defendant and operated by his son. Suit was initially filed in state court; all parties are citizens of Ohio. 

The defendants attempted to remove the case to federal court asserting that the 2011 Amendments to the removal statute authorized removal on the basis of a federal court’s admiralty jurisdiction citing Lu Junhong v. Boeing Co., 792 F.3d 805 (7th Cir. 2015) and Ryan v. Hercules Offshore, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 2d 772 (S.D. Tex. 2013). The trial judge noted that the Seventh Circuit, in permitting removal of a wrongful death claim based on the court’s admiralty jurisdiction, was not binding and that the panel in that case noted that the plaintiffs did not argue that the “saving to suitors” clause prevented the removal. In addition, the author of the opinion in Ryan reversed course in a subsequent opinion. Lacking diversity, there was no basis for removal.

Plaintiffs moved also for costs and attorney’s fees. Judge Knepp noted that the basis asserted by defendants for removal is well settled in the Sixth Circuit making the action non-removable. With no “objective reasonable basis” for removal, the claimant is entitled to “just costs,” actual expenses and attorney’s fees as a result of the attempted removal.

The Current Loyola Maritime Law Journal

The Current is the blog of the Loyola New Orleans Maritime Law Journal, where we post updates to keep our readers up to date about new decisions in maritime law. We also post news about the Journal and its' members.

Previous
Previous

Court Enters Default on Claims in Limitation: Filing Answer Alone Does Not Amount to a Claim

Next
Next

Ryan Indemnity Doctrine Does Not Extend to Vessel Surveyor