This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Admiralty

Bay Marine Boatworks Inc. v. S/Y Pursuit, et al.

Published: Dec. 9, 2022 | Result Date: Apr. 1, 2022 | Filing Date: Aug. 4, 2020 |

Case number: 3:20-cv-05399-WHO Bench Decision –  Defense

Judge

William H. Orrick III

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Gordon P. Smith
(Kennedys CMK LLP)

Jonathan W. Thames
(Kennedys CMK LLP)


Defendant

Jennifer T. Sanchez
(Gibson, Robb & Lindh LLP)

Marisa G. Huber
(Gibson, Robb & Lindh LLP)

Michelle L. Tommey
(Gibson, Robb & Lindh LLP)


Facts

Bay Marine Boatworks, Inc. dba Svendsen's Bay Marine owned a Richmond boatyard. A 82-foot racing sloop owned by Christopher Wollen was placed in the boatyard so that Svendsen's could perform work on it in May 2019. Svendsen's filed suit in August 2020, and Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issued a warrant to arrest the racing vessel. Wollen intervened but his motion to quash was denied. On February 12, 2021, the parties reached a settlement. As part of the settlement agreement, Wollen agreed to pay $100 per day the boat was not removed. On November 2021, the parties agreed in court that the vessel would be removed by January 12, 2022, but that did not happen.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that the court should substitute the initial contract fee of the $100 fee nunc pro tunc from August 1, 2021, two weeks after the parties agreed the repairs were finished, onward. Plaintiff argued that the court was allowed to amend the order of conditional dismissal under Rules of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) to alter the underlying settlement agreement because Wollen has unfairly taken advantage of the $100 per day fee and delayed removing the vessel from the boatyard.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants alleged that the court cannot use their power to rewrite a settlement agreement.

Result

The court denied plaintiff's motion to amend.


#139880

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390