Opinion ID: 2777755
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Catlin III

Text: On July 30, 2013, the district court once again opined on the dispute, this time regarding the outstanding motions for summary judgment filed by Catlin and SJT, respectively. Catlin (Syndicate 2003) at Lloyd's v. San Juan Towing & Marine Servs., Inc., 974 F. Supp. 2d 64 (D.P.R. 2013) (Catlin III). In substance, the court concluded that notwithstanding its finding that the PERSEVERANCE was not a vessel, federal admiralty jurisdiction and law did attach to this controversy because the interpretation of a maritime contract was at issue (as per Catlin II). Id. at 74-76. Furthermore, the district court held that the doctrine of uberrimae fidei's representation and disclosure requirements together constituted an entrenched federal precedent that would apply to this case if the facts alleged by Catlin were proven to be correct. Id. at 75-76. The court, however, was unable to decide the merits of these contentions because there were factual matters in dispute that needed to be resolved in a trial -10- and not via summary judgment. Id. at 79-80. In ruling on the question as to the risks covered by the Policy, an alternate issue raised by Catlin's denial of coverage, the district court found that the Policy was an all risk insurance policy, as contended by SJT. Id. at 83. Summary judgment, however, could not be entered on behalf of SJT on this issue because there were factual issues in dispute as to whether the PERSEVERANCE sank due to fortuitous circumstance[s] or casualty . . . covered under the all risk policy. Id. at 84. These outstanding factual issues needed to be resolved through a trial.