Court Opinion

ID: 9950739
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-14 18:00:51.197405+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:36:37.723555
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-20312   Document: 86-1   Page: 1   Date Filed: 03/14/2024

      United States Court of Appeals
           for the Fifth Circuit                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                       ____________
                                                               FILED
                                                         March 14, 2024
                         No. 23-20312
                       ____________                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                               Clerk
In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of
M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of
Liability

Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal,

                                               Petitioner—Appellee,

                            versus

Daniel Sanchez,

                                              Claimant—Appellant,

Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C.,

                                               Claimant—Appellee,
_____________________________

In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of
M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of
Liability

Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal,

                                               Petitioner—Appellee,

                            versus

Michael Randolph,
Case: 23-20312          Document: 86-1         Page: 2      Date Filed: 03/14/2024

                                                               Claimant—Appellant,

Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C.,

                                                                Claimant—Appellee,
_____________________________

In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of
M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of
Liability

Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal,

                                                                Petitioner—Appellee,

                                        versus

David Hayes,

                                                               Claimant—Appellant,

Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C.,

                                            Claimant—Appellee.
                 ______________________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Texas
                  USDC Nos. 4:21-CV-2965, 4:21-CV-2966,
                               4:21-CV-2967
                 ______________________________

Before Wiener, Haynes, and Higginson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *

     _____________________
     *
         This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

                                           2
Case: 23-20312       Document: 86-1        Page: 3   Date Filed: 03/14/2024

                                 No. 23-20312

       Claimants-Appellants Daniel Sanchez, Michael Randolph, and David
Hayes (the “Seaman-Claimants”) appeal the district court’s order denying
their motion to lift the limitation stay imposed by the Limitation of Liability
Act of 1851, 46 U.S.C. § 30511(c). The Seaman-Claimants argue that Claim-
ant-Appellee Intercontinental Terminals Company’s (“ITC”) claims
against Petitioner-Appellee Kirby Inland Marine, LP (“Kirby”) are invalid
and thus ITC’s refusal to enter stipulations consistent with our decision in
Odeco Oil & Gas Co., Drilling Division v. Bonnette, 74 F.3d 671 (5th Cir. 1996)
is not an impediment to lifting the stay. However, the district court has never
ruled on the validity of ITC’s claims against Kirby; in fact, the Seaman-
Claimants’ motion to dismiss those claims remains pending. We therefore
REMAND for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to expedi-
tiously consider the Seaman-Claimants’ motion to dismiss in the first in-
stance, and we retain jurisdiction over this limited remand pending the dis-
trict court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss. See United States v. Gomez, 905
F.3d 347, 356 (5th Cir. 2018). After that court’s ruling, this appeal shall re-
turn to the same panel.
       This case is REMANDED FOR LIMITED CONSIDERA-
TION CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.

                                       3