United States v. EX-USS Cabot/Dedalo
2002 A.M.C. 1974, 297 F.3d 378, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 13134 (2002)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The U.S. Coast Guard cannot assert a salvage lien for actions taken pursuant to a mandatory, pre-existing statutory duty, such as abating pollution threats under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), because such services are not 'voluntary' as required for a valid salvage claim.
Facts:
- The U.S.S. Cabot Dédalo Museum Foundation (the 'Foundation') owned the EX-U.S.S. CABOT/DEDALO, an unmanned, decommissioned aircraft carrier, and moored it at the Press Street Wharf in New Orleans.
- In April 1996, the U.S. Coast Guard, citing the ship's dilapidated condition and unsatisfactory moorings as a threat to port safety, ordered the Foundation to move the vessel.
- After the Foundation failed to act, the Coast Guard, invoking its authority under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), removed hazardous materials and upgraded the ship's moorings.
- In 1997, after a bulk carrier, the M/V TOMIS FUTURE, allided with the CABOT, the Coast Guard again ordered the Foundation to hire a tug and move the vessel to a safe mooring site.
- When the Foundation again failed to act, the Coast Guard hired tugs to stand by the ship for seven weeks and then moved it to a safer location, explicitly stating it was acting under its FWPCA authority at a cost of over $500,000.
- The Foundation subsequently sold the CABOT, and the new owner contracted with Marine Salvage & Services, Inc. ('Marine Salvage') for wharfage and security.
- When the CABOT began to list in its berth, Marine Salvage took successful action to prevent it from capsizing.
Procedural Posture:
- Marine Salvage and others sued the CABOT in rem in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas to enforce liens for services provided.
- The U.S. government sued the CABOT in rem in the same court, asserting its own lien for the costs of securing and moving the vessel.
- The district court authorized the U.S. Marshal to arrest and auction the CABOT, which yielded sale proceeds of $185,000, leaving approximately $91,250 after administrative costs.
- Following a bench trial on the priority of claims, the district court held that the government possessed a valid salvage lien that primed Marine Salvage's lien for necessaries.
- Marine Salvage, as Intervenor Plaintiff-Appellant, appealed the district court's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the U.S. government, through the Coast Guard, have a valid salvage lien for services rendered to a vessel when those services were performed under the mandatory pollution-abatement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA)?
Opinions:
Majority - Wiener
No. The U.S. government does not have a valid salvage lien because the Coast Guard's actions were not voluntary. A successful salvage claim requires that the service be rendered voluntarily, not as a result of a pre-existing duty. The evidence, including the Coast Guard's own letters and testimony, demonstrates that it acted under its mandatory duty as outlined in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) to abate the threat of oil pollution. The FWPCA uses compulsory language like 'shall,' creating a statutory duty that removes the element of voluntariness required for a salvage claim. Furthermore, by acting under its statutory authority, the government forced its assistance on the vessel's owner, precluding the owner's right to refuse salvage services, which further undermines any claim to be a voluntary salvor.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the 'voluntariness' element of a salvage claim as it applies to government agencies. It establishes a clear precedent that when the Coast Guard acts pursuant to a specific, mandatory statutory duty like the FWPCA, it cannot later re-characterize its actions as voluntary salvage to gain a high-priority lien. This ruling protects the lien priority of private commercial actors who provide services to vessels, preventing the government from using a salvage claim to leapfrog them in line for payment after performing its public safety functions. The case forces a sharp distinction between the Coast Guard's discretionary rescue functions and its mandatory pollution-prevention duties.
