ZAGKLARA v. SPRAGUE ENERGY CORP

Filing 158

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION denying 155 Motion for Reconsideration By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
EIRINI ZAGKLARA, individually and
as personal representative of the estate of
IOANNIS ZAGKLARAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SPRAGUE ENERGY CORP.,
Defendant & Third Party
Plaintiff,
v.
LEOPARD SHIPPING et al.,
Third Party Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) Docket no. 2:10-cv-445-GZS
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Before the Court is Third Party Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 155).
The Court received no responses by the expedited response deadline. Nonetheless, the Court hereby
DENIES the Motion for Reconsideration.
Via this Motion, Third Party Defendants Leopard Shipping Company Limited and A.M.
Nomikos Transworld Maritime Agencies S.A (together, “Ship Owners”) ask this Court to correct and
clarify a portion of the January 22, 2013 Order on Motion for General Maritime Law (ECF No. 153).
The Court notes that the Ship Owners filed no brief in connection with Plaintiff’s underlying Motion
for Application of General Maritime Law. Having failed to submit a response, the Ship Owners
arguably have forfeited any right to ask for reconsideration.

1

However, the Court hereby clarifies that its Order on Motion for Application of General
Maritime Law provides legal rulings that will control the upcoming jury trial of the claims between
Plaintiff and Defendant. The Order was not necessarily intended to have the same application to the
bench trial of the third party claims. If Ship Owners contend, as asserted in the pending Motion, that
the Longshore & Harbor Worker’s Compensation Act (“LHWCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., as
interpreted in the case law, defines the duties the Ship Owners owed to Defendant and/or Plaintiff,
the Court expects that Ship Owners will fully brief that position in both the trial brief and any posttrial briefing. Before announcing any decision on the third party claims, the Court anticipates it will
require post-trial memoranda as well as proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Upon
review of this full briefing, the Court will make a final determination of the law controlling
Defendant’s claims against the Ship Owners.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 4th day of February, 2013.

2