The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALLIED SHIPYARD INC. CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS NO: 20-2744
LOGAN MOORE SECTION: “H”
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are Plaintiff Allied Shipyard Inc.’s Motion to Remand
(Doc. 8) and Defendant Logan Moore’s Motion to Consolidate Cases (Doc. 9).
For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED, and Defendant’s
Motion is DENIED AS MOOT.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Allied Shipyard Inc. filed this action in the 17th Judicial District
Court for Louisiana seeking payment from Defendant Logan Moore pursuant
to an Act of Continuing Guaranty that obligates Moore to pay Plaintiff for debts
not paid by Marlin Oilfield Divers, Inc. (“Marlin”). Plaintiff and Marlin entered
into an agreement for Plaintiff to provide Marlin with certain materials and
services for the benefit of its vessel, the M/V IRON MAIDEN. Plaintiff alleges
that Marlin has failed to pay the amount owed under the contract, and it has
sought that amount from Moore in this action. Moore removed the suit against
1
him to this Court on the basis of admiralty jurisdiction. Prior to Plaintiff’s state
court suit, Marlin, of which Moore is president and CEO, filed an action in this
Court seeking a declaratory judgment that it does not owe any amount to
Plaintiff because Plaintiff’s work resulted in a fire that damaged the M/V IRON
MAIDEN.1
There are two motions now pending in this matter. First, Plaintiff moves
for remand back to state court and for attorney’s fees and costs for the
prosecution of this motion. Second, Defendant seeks to consolidate this action
with Marlin’s earlier suit against Plaintiff.
LEGAL STANDARD
Generally, a defendant may remove a civil state court action to federal
court if the federal court has original jurisdiction over the action.2 The burden
is on the removing party to show “that federal jurisdiction exists and that
removal was proper.”3 When determining whether federal jurisdiction exists,
courts consider “the claims in the state court petition as they existed at the
time of removal.”4
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Plaintiff moves for remand of this action, arguing that this Court does
not have jurisdiction pursuant to the “savings to suitors” clause of 28 U.S.C. §
1 Marlin Oilfield Divers, Inc. v. Allied Shipyard, Inc. (No. 20-2431).
2 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
3 Barker v. Hercules Offshore, Inc., 713 F.3d 208, 212 (5th Cir. 2013) (quoting
Manguno v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 276 F.3d 720, 722 (5th Cir. 2002)).
4 Manguno, 276 F.3d at 723.
2
1333. Section 1333 states that district courts have original jurisdiction over
general maritime claims “saving to suitors in all cases all other remedies to
which they are otherwise entitled.” Under the “saving to suitors” clause,
general maritime law claims filed in state court were traditionally non-
removable.5 Defendant argues that the 2011 amendments to 28 U.S.C. § 1441
changed the law so that general maritime law claims are now removable. The
weight of courts considering this issue, however, has disagreed.6
Although the Fifth Circuit has not yet offered guidance on whether the
2011 amendments to § 1441 rendered maritime claims removable, every
district judge in the Eastern District of Louisiana to consider the issue,
including this one, “has maintained that general maritime law claims are not
removable under § 1333 as part of the original jurisdiction of the court absent
an independent basis for federal jurisdiction.”7 Defendant does not provide any
reason why this Court should deviate from this result. Accordingly, for the
reasons previously given by this Court and others, this matter cannot be
removed on the basis of general maritime jurisdiction alone.8 Defendant does
not argue that diversity or federal question jurisdiction is present in this case.
5 Alexis v. Hilcorp Energy Co., No. CV 20-2289, 2020 WL 5959744, at *5 (E.D. La.
2020) (citing In re Dutile, 935 F.2d 61, 63 (5th Cir. 1991)).
6 Id.
7 Island Ventures, LLC v. K-Mar Supply II, LLC, No. CV 20-2263, 2020 WL 6269136,
at *6 (E.D. La. Oct. 26, 2020) (Brown, J.) (and cases cited therein); Riley v. Llog Expl. Co.
LLC, No. CIV.A. 14-437, 2014 WL 4345002, at *4 (E.D. La. 2014) (Milazzo, J.). Defendant’s
Opposition points out that Judge Morgan held otherwise in Costanza v. Accutrans, Inc., No.
CV 17-5706, 2017 WL 4785004, at *2 (E.D. La. 2017), but that opinion offered no analysis of
the issue.
8 See Riley, 2014 WL 4345002, at *4; Gregoire v. Enter. Marine Servs., LLC, 38 F.
Supp. 3d 749, 764 (E.D. La. 2014).
3
Defendant does contend, however, that this Court may exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 if it is
consolidated with the previously filed, related action. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 42 allows the court to consolidate actions pending before it if they
have a common question of law or fact. Because this matter is not properly
before this Court, consolidation would likewise be improper. Further, “while
supplemental jurisdiction applies to claims asserted in the same action, it does
not apply to claims asserted in separate actions consolidated under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 42.”9 “[C]onsolidation does not cause one civil action to
emerge from two; the actions do not lose their separate identity.”10 Accordingly,
this argument too fails. Removal was improper, and remand is appropriate.
This Court does not find, however, that an award of attorney’s fees and
costs for the prosecution of this motion is warranted. Given that some courts
have reached a contrary conclusion on the interpretation of the 2011
amendments to § 1441, it cannot be said that Defendant had no objectively
reasonable basis for removal. This request is denied.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand is GRANTED,
and this matter is remanded to the 17th Judicial District Court of Louisiana.
Its request for attorney’s fees and costs for the prosecution of this Motion is
DENIED. Defendant’s Motion to Consolidate is DENIED AS MOOT.
9 Allen v. Occidental Fire & Cas. Co. of N. Carolina, No. CIV.A. 11-2806, 2012 WL
1118764, at *4 (E.D. La. 2012).
10 McKenzie v. United States, 678 F.2d 571, 574 (5th Cir. 1982).
4
New Orleans, Louisiana this 15th day of December, 2020.
g TRICHE hh
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE