Broward Shipyard, Inc. v. M/V Shamrock

Filing 15

ORDER Requiring Proof of Service. Please see Order for details. Plaintiff must demonstrate compliance with Local Admiralty Rule C(8) by 8/5/2013. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on 7/26/2013. (bon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
IN ADMIRALTY
CASE NO. 13-61028-ROSENBAUM
BROWARD SHIPYARD, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
M/V SHAMROCK, a 1989 52.5' Halmatic
built, twin diesel motor vessel last registered
in Monserrat, British West Indies, Official
Number 730834, in rem,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
ORDER REQUIRING PROOF OF SERVICE
This cause is before the Court upon Plaintiff, Broward Shipyard, Inc.’s Motion for Final
Default Judgment, or Alternatively, Motion for Final Summary Judgment Against the M/V Shamrock
[D.E. 14]. Local Admiralty Rule C(8), S.D. Fla., provides that
The party seeking the entry of default shall also file such other
proof sufficient to demonstrate that due notice of the action and
arrest have been given by:
(a) Service upon the master or other person having custody of the
property; and
(b) Delivery, or by certified mail, return receipt requested (or
international effective equivalent), to every other person, including
any known owner, who has not appeared or intervened in the
action, and who is known to have, or claims to have, a possessory
interest in the property.
The party seeking entry of default judgment under Local Rule 3(h)
may be excused for failing to give notice to such “other person”
1

upon a satisfactory showing that diligent effort was made
to give notice without success; and
(c) Publication as required by Supplemental Rule C(4) and Local
Admiralty Rule C(4).
L. Adm. R. C(8), S.D. Fla. (emphasis added). A review of the record indicates that Plaintiff has
provided proof of service by publication, which satisfies subparagraph (c) only. See D.E. 11.
However, it is not clear from the record that Plaintiff has complied with the other provisions of Rule
C(8), including providing proof that notice has been given to the vessel’s purported owner, Xperts
of the Seas, LLC. See D.E. 1, ¶ 5.
The Court cannot consider Plaintiff’s Motion until Plaintiff demonstrates compliance with
the Local Admiralty Rules. Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff shall
demonstrate compliance with Rule C(8) on or before August 5, 2013. Failure to demonstrate
compliance will result in the denial of Plaintiff’s Motion.
DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 26th day of July 2013.

_______________________________________
ROBIN S. ROSENBAUM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to counsel of record

2