In re Complaint and Petition of Brian Mackey

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 Case No.: 3:23-cv-00337-JAH-MSB IN RE: COMPLAINT AND PETITION OF BRIAN MACKEY AS OWNER OF ORDER DENYING REQUESTS A CERTAIN 1990 TRIUMPH BOATS 13 WITHOUT PREJUDICE 150, 18 FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY (ECF Nos. 2, 3, 4) Petitioner Brian Mackey (“Petitioner”) has filed a Complaint on February 21, 2023, pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 30501 et seq., and Supplemental Admiralty Rule F, claiming the right to exoneration from, or limitation of liability for, all claims arising out of a claimed incident occurring on or about May 21, 2022, on the Colorado River north of the I-10 overpass involving a certain 1990 TRIUMPH BOATS 150, 18 involving H.N.

22 (“Decedent”)1. Petitioner was the owner of the Vessel involved in the May 21, 2022, incident. Petitioner also seeks a Monition, (ECF No. 2), and an ad interim stipulation of On information and belief Decedent was a minor at the time of her death and || the value of the vessel,” (ECF No. 3), and motion requesting an issuance of notice of filing || for exoneration from or limitation of liability, (ECF No. 4). Petitioner has submitted three ||proposed orders without any accompanying motions or applications supporting his ||requests. As such, the Court is unable to determine the appropriateness of the requests.

5 || Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Petitioner’s proposed orders are denied without || prejudice.

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

8 || DATED: March 16, 2023 9 VU 11 J A. HOUSTON NITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE || 24 Although security is required in order to commence a limitation of liability action, ||the Supreme Court has approved of alternatives to depositing the funds or transferring the vessel interest by allowing a plaintiff to stipulate to the value of the vessel. See, e.g., Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. of Hartford v. S. Pac. Co., 273 U.S. 207, 218-19 (1927). The || Ninth Circuit has held that a stipulation coupled with a letter of undertaking from an insurer is sufficient security. Petitioner’s request regarding the stipulation of value does not include a letter of undertaking from Petitioner’s insurer. sy