Opinion ID: 201761
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Rights and Liabilities

Text: 12 Finally, to ascertain whether, for purposes of § 1292(a)(3), the substantive rights and liabilities of these adversaries were sufficiently determined by the order, Martha's Vineyard, 833 F.2d at 1064, we must identify a decision on the merits of the claims or defenses underlying the dispute which determines substantive rights. Id. 13 Although the district court's decision and order did not fully resolve the plaintiffs' claims regarding their ultimate damages, it did conclusively determine the substantive grounds of the complaint. The district court determined that defendants (the vessel owners) had violated the requirements of § 10601 in the fishing agreements they entered into with plaintiffs (the fishermen). Huntress, 301 F.Supp.2d at 146. In addition, the court determined that § 11107 applies to lay share fishermen and therefore could be utilized by Plaintiffs as a statutory default wage in place of their void contracts with Defendants. Id. at 148. Thus, the district court found that plaintiffs were statutorily entitled to recover `the highest rate of wages at the port from which the seaman was engaged or the amount agreed to be given the seaman at the time of engagement, whichever is higher.' Id. at 146 (quoting 46 U.S.C. § 11107). Therefore, the district court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs as to the application of § 10601 and § 11107. We are satisfied that the district court's ruling meets the substantive rights and liabilities prerequisite of § 1292(a)(3). We conclude, therefore, that we have jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal.