Court Opinion

ID: 10719
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 05:56:41+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:56.003752
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                       _______________________

                             No. 95-30730
                       _______________________

MARINE OFFICE OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL,

                                                        Plaintiffs,

                               versus

VULCAN MV, her engines, tackle, etc.,ET AL,

                                                      Defendants.
          ____________________________________________

ASHLAND CEMENT CORPORATION INCORPORATED,

                               Plaintiff- Appellant Cross-Appellee,

                               versus

THE MV VULCAN, her engines, tackle apparel,
furniture, etc. in rem.

                                                 Defendant-Appellee

RONDEL SHIPPING LTD.

                                Defendant-Appellee Cross-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                            (92-CV-456)
_________________________________________________________________

                          October 23, 1996
Before JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges, and FERGUSON*, District
Judge.

PER CURIAM:**

            The court has considered the parties’ appeals in light of

the briefs, oral arguments and pertinent portions of the record.

Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law and so

affirm the judgment of the district court.            See Fifth Circuit Local

Rule 47.6.

            Further, the notice of appeal filed by Rondel Shipping

Ltd. did not sufficiently identify the M/V VULCAN as a cross-

appellant in rem.       It is not “otherwise clear from the notice”

filed by Rondel that the VULCAN in rem was a party to the appeal.

Consequently, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 3(c), the notice did not

include the vessel’s intent to appeal in rem.             The VULCAN’s appeal

is DISMISSED. All Pacific Trading, Inc. v. Vessel M/V Hanjin Yosu,

7 F.3d 1427 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1194 (1994).

      *
            District   Judge   for   the   Western District of Texas, sitting by
designation.

     **
        Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

                                           2