UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE SKANSKA USA CIVIL

SOUTHEAST, INC. AND 

SKANSKA USA, INC AS

OWNERS OF THE BARGE KS ADMIRALTY RULE 9(H)

5531 PRAYING FOR 

EXONERATION FROM OR CIVIL ACTION NO.

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 3:20-CV-5980 – RV – MJF 

CLAIM OF MARILYN SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

WOODBURY, ROGER VINSON

CLAIMANT

_____________________________/

MARILYN WOODBURY’S RESPONSE AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW 

IN OPPOSITION TO SKANSKA’S AMENDED MOTION TO 

DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Marilyn Woodbury (“Woodbury”), by and through her undersigned counsel, 

hereby responds to Skanska USA Civil Southeast, Inc.’s (“Skanska”) Amended 

Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment as follows:

1. Skanska’s Amended Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary 

Judgment is directed at claimants asserting claims for economic losses resulting 

from damage to the Pensacola Bay Bridge. 

2. Woodbury has asserted a claim in this matter for damage to her

seawall that was impacted by a barge owned by Skanska. Woodbury’s damage 

claim relates to property in which she has a proprietary interest, as asserted in her 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1169 Filed 05/25/21 Page 1 of 3
Claim filed in this matter. Accordingly, Skanska’s Amended Motion is not 

applicable to Woodbury’s claims. 

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

A motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) challenges the legal sufficiency of 

a complaint. To survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff must plead “enough facts to 

state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 

550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677- 8 (2009). 

“A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows 

the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the 

misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.

Skanska’s Amended Motion is directed at claimants asserting economic 

impact claims relating to damage to the Pensacola Bay Bridge. Woodbury has 

asserted a claim for damage to her seawall in which she has a proprietary interest, 

and her claims are not addressed in Skanska’s Motion. 

Woodbury adopts and incorporates all arguments made by other claimants in 

opposition to Skanska’s Amended Motion to the extent consistent with 

Woodbury’s asserted claims. 

WHEREFORE, Woodbury requests that this Court deny Skanska’s 

Amended Motion with respect to claims asserted by Woodbury, and grant any 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1169 Filed 05/25/21 Page 2 of 3
other different relief that this Court deems just and appropriate under the 

circumstances. 

/s/ Daniel M. Ewert

DANIEL M. EWERT 

Florida Bar Number 0658146 

MOORE, HILL & WESTMORELAND, P.A. 

Maritime Place | Suite 100 

350 West Cedar Street (32502) 

Post Office Box 13290 

Pensacola, Florida 32591-3290 

Telephone: (850) 434-3541 

dewert@mhw-law.com

kgraham@mhw-law.com

Attorney for Marilyn Woodbury

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Daniel M. Ewert, hereby certify that on May 25, 2021, I caused a copy of 

the foregoing to be filed through the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will serve all 

counsel of record, specifically including: 

Kenneth H. Tribuch, Esq.

Derek A. Walker, Esq.

Chaffe McCall LLP 

801 Travis, Suite 1910 

Houston, Texas 77002 

kenneth.tribuch@chaffe.com

WalkerD@chaffe.com

Blanchard@chaffe.com

trotter@chaffe.com

Attorneys for Skanska USA

Civil Southeast Inc. and Skanska USA,

Inc.

Jeremy C. Branning, Esq.

Scott A. Remington, Esq.

Daniel E. Harrell, Esq.

Clark Partington

P.O. Box 13010

Pensacola, FL 32591-3010

jbranning@clarkpartington.com

sremington@clarkpartington.com

dharrel@clarkpartington.com

Attorneys for Skanska USA

Civil Southeast Inc. and Skanska USA,

Inc.

/s/ Daniel M. Ewert

Daniel M. Ewert

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1169 Filed 05/25/21 Page 3 of 3