Limitation of Liability Denied in Recreational Boating Accident: Exoneration from Liability is Granted
Schneider v. Leonard, 2023 WL 2495954; 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42855 * (M.D. Fl. March 20, 2023, Stelle, J.)
Two recreational vessels collided in fog off the coast of Naples, Florida resulting in a claim for exoneration/limitation being filed by one owner (Schneider) and then an answer, claim and defenses by another (Leonard) who then filed suit against the operator of the Leonard vessel, namely Slade. After a one-day non-jury trial the court issued extensive findings of fact and conclusions of law.[1]
Both vessel owners raised the presumption of the Pennsylvania rule. But, the trial judge did not apply that rule as both parties relied on the standard of “good seamanship” (COLREGS 2[a]).[2] The court noted: “The general requirement of good seamanship is not necessarily a rule intended to prevent collisions such that the Pennsylvania Rule would always apply…. To hold otherwise would render the Pennsylvania presumption applicable to virtually every deficient act by a seaman, no matter how minor.”[3]
Judge Stelle found that Schneider was in command of his vessel and participated in the acts which Leonard claimed constituted negligence. Thus, he had privity and knowledge.[4] Despite this, the sole cause of the collision was the negligence of Leonard for operating a vessel at excessive speed in fog.[5] Thus, Schneider was exonerated from any liability to Leonard whose claim was dismissed including the claim of Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, as insurer and subrogee of Leonard and her vessel.[6]
