Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05117/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05117-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 120
Nature of Suit: Marine Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1333 Admiralty

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGER LEASING CORP., a Nevada

corporation,

Plaintiff,

 v.

Barge PT. POTRERO, official number

523213, in rem, TED BUHL and JANE

DOE BUHL, individually, and the

marital community composed thereof;

BUHL DIVING & SALVAGE, a sole

proprietorship, in personam

Defendants. 

AND ALL RELATED ACTIONS

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C-05-5117 SC

ORDER RE: CLAIMANTS'

MOTION TO QUASH

ARREST OR IN THE

ALTERNATIVE FOR COSTS

SECURITY 

 

I. INTRODUCTION

Claimants in this case, Riverview Equipment Company LLC and

Jerico Products, Inc. ("Claimants"), filed a motion on January 13,

2006 in which they sought an adversary hearing on seven days'

notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Supplemental

Admiralty Rule E(4)(f) ("Supplemental Rule E(4)(f)") and Local

Admiralty and Maritime Rule 4-8 ("Local Maritime Rule 4-8"). The

Court denied that motion but allowed Claimants leave to re-notice

and re-file their motion in compliance with the usual 35-day

briefing schedule, which Claimants have now done. According to

Claimants' moving papers and declarations attached thereto, an

adversary hearing is necessary to determine whether Plaintiff in

this case, Greger Leasing Corporation ("Plaintiff" or "Greger

Case 3:05-cv-05117-SC Document 62 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

Leasing"), has a valid maritime lien on the in rem Defendant in

this case, the Barge Pt. Potrero, which was arrested by the United

States Marshal Service on December 14, 2005. The arrest was

conducted pursuant to an Order of this Court that was issued

following the filing of a verified Complaint and appropriate

motions on December 12, 2005. 

II. DISCUSSION

Claimants assert that Plaintiff does not have and never had a

valid maritime lien on the Barge Pt. Potrero, and, on that basis,

have requested an adversary hearing to prove their claim and have

the arrest quashed. See Claimants' Motion to Quash Arrest at 8-11

("Claimants' Mtn."). In the alternative, Claimants request that

the Court order Plaintiff to post a bond in an amount greater than

or equal to $25,000.00. See id. at 14. Claimants assert that

they are entitled to a hearing on these claims pursuant to

Supplemental Rule E(4)(f) and Local Maritime Rule 4-8. 

Plaintiff has opposed Claimants' motion on a variety of

grounds, including his claim that Supplemental Rule E(4)(f) does

not provide for an adversary hearing nearly three months after

arrest of a vessel, and that, in any event, Claimants have already

waived their right to such a hearing. See Plaintiff's Opposition

to Motion to Quash Arrest at 3-10.

The Court, now having had the benefit of a full briefing

schedule, finds that good cause exists to hold an adversary

hearing under Supplemental Rule E(4)(f) and Local Maritime Rule 

4-8 to determine whether Plaintiff holds a valid lien on in rem

Defendant Barge Pt. Potrero and whether arrest of the in rem

Case 3:05-cv-05117-SC Document 62 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 3

Defendant should be quashed. 

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the parties to appear for such

a hearing on March 20, 2006, at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 17th

floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. Parties

shall have the opportunity to present all relevant evidence by

introducing exhibits and presenting testimony of live witnesses. 

A full list of all witnesses and exhibits shall be filed with the

Court no later than March 16, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2006

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05117-SC Document 62 Filed 03/13/06 Page 3 of 3