Successfully defended claim of spoilation involving video of check in procedures relating to rental instruction

Granted motion to quash summons and order finding lack of personal jurisdiction over Canadian clients

Sought and obtained order sustaining demurrer on claim against marina arising out of fall from houseboat

Successfully defended dismissal of yacht broker in limitation proceeding in federal court

Obtained favorable ruling as to liability issues concerning a jet ski rental company and clarified indemnity obligations of renter.

Vacated arrest of vessel in dispute concerning contractual obligations over bunker supply

Vacated judgment on appeal resulting in dismissal of case under Hawai‘i law

Sought and obtained ruling clarifying liability insurance coverage for rental watercraft operators and insurer obligations in maritime incidents

Prevailed on motion in limine excluded loss of use damages for damaged recreational vessel

Obtained ruling as to counter-security obligations in a shipping contract dispute, reinforcing maritime contract principles in arrest proceedings

Exonerated rental company from liability, reinforcing the application of admiralty limitation of liability principles

Obtained judgment in favor of insurer in a dispute over policy coverage and liability exclusions

Received favorable ruling clarifying  landlord obligations under California tenant law in a property management liability dispute

Prevailed in dismissal of a case brought by a passenger who claimed to have developed a blood clot following his fall from a power scooter aboard a coach transporting him during the land portion of an Alaskan vacation package.

Obtained dismissal in federal court action against London Market insurers based on the insured not making a prima facie showing that the underwriters' contacts with Hawaii satisfied the purposeful availment prong of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis, such that they should have reasonably anticipated being haled into court there.

Conceived and developed procedure for recognizing anti-suit injunction by Bermuda court and enforcing arbitration agreement of security guard seaman suing employer for alleged sexual assault by a crewmember.

Coordinated mass tort action involving passenger personal injury cases arising from cruise ship listing off the coast of Florida.

Successfully obtained demurrer and dismissal of matter brought by Californian Jones Act seaman based on forum non conveniens where seaman employer was primarily based in Seattle and the injury occurred in Alaska.

Prevailed on appeal in showing amendment to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204 – which had changed California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) standing requirements to require an allegation of injury in fact – was applicable even though the case was filed before passage of the amendment.

Consolidated and subsequently resolved civil collection matters involving claims for breach of contract, foreclosure on mechanic’s liens, open book accounts, account stated, quantum meruit, and unfair competition against defendant developers of a condominium project in Woodside, California.

Oversaw defense of cruise line in seeking dismissal based on forum non conveniens in case brought by security guard alleging injury due to pirate attack off coast of Somalia.

Quashed federal court subpoena duces tecum for production of third party’s tanker for inspection based on showing burdens outweighed needs for inspection.

Reported Decisions

Geoserve Energy Transp. DMCC v. Vega S (S.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32905,

Ortoli v. Oceangate Inc., (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18098

In re Luxury Jet Ski Rentals LLC (S.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234850

Rodriguez v. Corner (D. Haw. June 18, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237262

Willis v. Williams Sports Rentals, Inc. (E.D. Cal. July 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135521

Pamina, LLC v. Delta Marine Indus., Inc., (W.D. Wash. June 10, 2024) 736 F. Supp. 3d 950.

Tommy Lynch as Adm’r for the Estate of v. Hernandez ( D. Nev. Nov. 7, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222644

Ehart v. Lahaina Divers, Inc. (9th Cir. (Mar. 14, 2024) 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6161

Lopez v. One Santa Fe PMC, LLC (Cal. Super. Ct. L.A.(Dec. 5, 2023) 2023 Cal. Super. LEXIS 101900

MacIas v. City of Los Angeles (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20496

Axis Ins. Co. v. Triathlon (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242168

Gonzalez v. GE, (C.D. Cal. June 23, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110071

Abed v. Mubanda (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2020)  2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1951

Powell N Around LLC v. Parson  (United States District Court, District of Arizona, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209769

Kabogoza v. Blue Water Boating  (United States District Court, Eastern District of California, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60346

Gilmer v. Symetra Life Ins. Health & Welfare Plan (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138390

In re Complaint & Petition of Blue Water Boating, Inc.  (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2019) 786 Fed. Appx. 703

In re Bountiful Oceans, Inc. (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2018) 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95491

Russul v. Zim Am. Integrated Shipping Servs. Co. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2007) 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25264.

Thornton v. Career Training Center, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 2005) 128 Cal. App. 4th 116, 26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 723.

Holland America v. Wartsila North America, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1769.

Paradise Cruise, Ltd. v. Michael Else & Co. (United States District Court, District of Hawaii, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1572.

In re Air Crash at Taipei (United States District Court, Central District of California 2004) 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31075.

Fitzpatrick v. Arco Marine (United States District Court, Central District of California, 2001)199 F.R.D. 663, 2001 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1390.

Keith Whiteman v. Grand Wailea Resort (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 1999) 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3594.

Ross v. F/V MELANIE (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1998)1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 577.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 1997 AMC 2713.

Boykin v. Boeing (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 128 F.3d 1279.

Hunt v. Shipowner's Mut. Protection & Indem. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 119 F.3d 6, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 26074.

Long v. M/V Melanie (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 918 F. Supp. 323, 1996 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1341.

Johnston v. M/V Dieu Si Bon (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21522,1997 American Maritime Cass (AMC) 14.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 1995) 1995 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 2625. 

Representative Matters

Successfully defended claim of spoilation involving video of check in procedures relating to rental instruction

Granted motion to quash summons and order finding lack of personal jurisdiction over Canadian clients

Sought and obtained order sustaining demurrer on claim against marina arising out of fall from houseboat

Successfully defended dismissal of yacht broker in limitation proceeding in federal court

Obtained favorable ruling as to liability issues concerning a jet ski rental company and clarified indemnity obligations of renter.

Vacated arrest of vessel in dispute concerning contractual obligations over bunker supply

Vacated judgment on appeal resulting in dismissal of case under Hawai‘i law

Sought and obtained ruling clarifying liability insurance coverage for rental watercraft operators and insurer obligations in maritime incidents

Prevailed on motion in limine excluded loss of use damages for damaged recreational vessel

Obtained ruling as to counter-security obligations in a shipping contract dispute, reinforcing maritime contract principles in arrest proceedings

Exonerated rental company from liability, reinforcing the application of admiralty limitation of liability principles

Obtained judgment in favor of insurer in a dispute over policy coverage and liability exclusions

Received favorable ruling clarifying  landlord obligations under California tenant law in a property management liability dispute

Prevailed in dismissal of a case brought by a passenger who claimed to have developed a blood clot following his fall from a power scooter aboard a coach transporting him during the land portion of an Alaskan vacation package.

Obtained dismissal in federal court action against London Market insurers based on the insured not making a prima facie showing that the underwriters' contacts with Hawaii satisfied the purposeful availment prong of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis, such that they should have reasonably anticipated being haled into court there.

Conceived and developed procedure for recognizing anti-suit injunction by Bermuda court and enforcing arbitration agreement of security guard seaman suing employer for alleged sexual assault by a crewmember.

Coordinated mass tort action involving passenger personal injury cases arising from cruise ship listing off the coast of Florida.

Successfully obtained demurrer and dismissal of matter brought by Californian Jones Act seaman based on forum non conveniens where seaman employer was primarily based in Seattle and the injury occurred in Alaska.

Prevailed on appeal in showing amendment to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204 – which had changed California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) standing requirements to require an allegation of injury in fact – was applicable even though the case was filed before passage of the amendment.

Consolidated and subsequently resolved civil collection matters involving claims for breach of contract, foreclosure on mechanic’s liens, open book accounts, account stated, quantum meruit, and unfair competition against defendant developers of a condominium project in Woodside, California.

Oversaw defense of cruise line in seeking dismissal based on forum non conveniens in case brought by security guard alleging injury due to pirate attack off coast of Somalia.

Quashed federal court subpoena duces tecum for production of third party’s tanker for inspection based on showing burdens outweighed needs for inspection.

Reported Decisions

Geoserve Energy Transp. DMCC v. Vega S (S.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32905,

Ortoli v. Oceangate Inc., (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18098

In re Luxury Jet Ski Rentals LLC (S.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234850

Rodriguez v. Corner (D. Haw. June 18, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237262

Willis v. Williams Sports Rentals, Inc. (E.D. Cal. July 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135521

Pamina, LLC v. Delta Marine Indus., Inc., (W.D. Wash. June 10, 2024) 736 F. Supp. 3d 950.

Tommy Lynch as Adm’r for the Estate of v. Hernandez ( D. Nev. Nov. 7, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222644

Ehart v. Lahaina Divers, Inc. (9th Cir. (Mar. 14, 2024) 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6161

Lopez v. One Santa Fe PMC, LLC (Cal. Super. Ct. L.A.(Dec. 5, 2023) 2023 Cal. Super. LEXIS 101900

MacIas v. City of Los Angeles (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20496

Axis Ins. Co. v. Triathlon (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242168

Gonzalez v. GE, (C.D. Cal. June 23, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110071

Abed v. Mubanda (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2020)  2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1951

Powell N Around LLC v. Parson  (United States District Court, District of Arizona, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209769

Kabogoza v. Blue Water Boating  (United States District Court, Eastern District of California, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60346

Gilmer v. Symetra Life Ins. Health & Welfare Plan (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138390

In re Complaint & Petition of Blue Water Boating, Inc.  (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2019) 786 Fed. Appx. 703

In re Bountiful Oceans, Inc. (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2018) 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95491

Russul v. Zim Am. Integrated Shipping Servs. Co. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2007) 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25264.

Thornton v. Career Training Center, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 2005) 128 Cal. App. 4th 116, 26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 723.

Holland America v. Wartsila North America, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1769.

Paradise Cruise, Ltd. v. Michael Else & Co. (United States District Court, District of Hawaii, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1572.

In re Air Crash at Taipei (United States District Court, Central District of California 2004) 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31075.

Fitzpatrick v. Arco Marine (United States District Court, Central District of California, 2001)199 F.R.D. 663, 2001 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1390.

Keith Whiteman v. Grand Wailea Resort (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 1999) 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3594.

Ross v. F/V MELANIE (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1998)1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 577.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 1997 AMC 2713.

Boykin v. Boeing (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 128 F.3d 1279.

Hunt v. Shipowner's Mut. Protection & Indem. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 119 F.3d 6, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 26074.

Long v. M/V Melanie (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 918 F. Supp. 323, 1996 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1341.

Johnston v. M/V Dieu Si Bon (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21522,1997 American Maritime Cass (AMC) 14.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 1995) 1995 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 2625. 

Representative Matters

Events

Successfully defended claim of spoilation involving video of check in procedures relating to rental instruction

Granted motion to quash summons and order finding lack of personal jurisdiction over Canadian clients

Sought and obtained order sustaining demurrer on claim against marina arising out of fall from houseboat

Successfully defended dismissal of yacht broker in limitation proceeding in federal court

Obtained favorable ruling as to liability issues concerning a jet ski rental company and clarified indemnity obligations of renter.

Vacated arrest of vessel in dispute concerning contractual obligations over bunker supply

Vacated judgment on appeal resulting in dismissal of case under Hawai‘i law

Sought and obtained ruling clarifying liability insurance coverage for rental watercraft operators and insurer obligations in maritime incidents

Prevailed on motion in limine excluded loss of use damages for damaged recreational vessel

Obtained ruling as to counter-security obligations in a shipping contract dispute, reinforcing maritime contract principles in arrest proceedings

Exonerated rental company from liability, reinforcing the application of admiralty limitation of liability principles

Obtained judgment in favor of insurer in a dispute over policy coverage and liability exclusions

Received favorable ruling clarifying  landlord obligations under California tenant law in a property management liability dispute

Prevailed in dismissal of a case brought by a passenger who claimed to have developed a blood clot following his fall from a power scooter aboard a coach transporting him during the land portion of an Alaskan vacation package.

Obtained dismissal in federal court action against London Market insurers based on the insured not making a prima facie showing that the underwriters' contacts with Hawaii satisfied the purposeful availment prong of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis, such that they should have reasonably anticipated being haled into court there.

Conceived and developed procedure for recognizing anti-suit injunction by Bermuda court and enforcing arbitration agreement of security guard seaman suing employer for alleged sexual assault by a crewmember.

Coordinated mass tort action involving passenger personal injury cases arising from cruise ship listing off the coast of Florida.

Successfully obtained demurrer and dismissal of matter brought by Californian Jones Act seaman based on forum non conveniens where seaman employer was primarily based in Seattle and the injury occurred in Alaska.

Prevailed on appeal in showing amendment to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204 – which had changed California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) standing requirements to require an allegation of injury in fact – was applicable even though the case was filed before passage of the amendment.

Consolidated and subsequently resolved civil collection matters involving claims for breach of contract, foreclosure on mechanic’s liens, open book accounts, account stated, quantum meruit, and unfair competition against defendant developers of a condominium project in Woodside, California.

Oversaw defense of cruise line in seeking dismissal based on forum non conveniens in case brought by security guard alleging injury due to pirate attack off coast of Somalia.

Quashed federal court subpoena duces tecum for production of third party’s tanker for inspection based on showing burdens outweighed needs for inspection.

Reported Decisions

Geoserve Energy Transp. DMCC v. Vega S (S.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32905,

Ortoli v. Oceangate Inc., (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2025) 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18098

In re Luxury Jet Ski Rentals LLC (S.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234850

Rodriguez v. Corner (D. Haw. June 18, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237262

Willis v. Williams Sports Rentals, Inc. (E.D. Cal. July 31, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135521

Pamina, LLC v. Delta Marine Indus., Inc., (W.D. Wash. June 10, 2024) 736 F. Supp. 3d 950.

Tommy Lynch as Adm’r for the Estate of v. Hernandez ( D. Nev. Nov. 7, 2024) 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222644

Ehart v. Lahaina Divers, Inc. (9th Cir. (Mar. 14, 2024) 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6161

Lopez v. One Santa Fe PMC, LLC (Cal. Super. Ct. L.A.(Dec. 5, 2023) 2023 Cal. Super. LEXIS 101900

MacIas v. City of Los Angeles (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20496

Axis Ins. Co. v. Triathlon (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242168

Gonzalez v. GE, (C.D. Cal. June 23, 2023) 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110071

Abed v. Mubanda (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2020)  2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1951

Powell N Around LLC v. Parson  (United States District Court, District of Arizona, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209769

Kabogoza v. Blue Water Boating  (United States District Court, Eastern District of California, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60346

Gilmer v. Symetra Life Ins. Health & Welfare Plan (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2019) 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138390

In re Complaint & Petition of Blue Water Boating, Inc.  (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2019) 786 Fed. Appx. 703

In re Bountiful Oceans, Inc. (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2018) 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95491

Russul v. Zim Am. Integrated Shipping Servs. Co. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2007) 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25264.

Thornton v. Career Training Center, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 2005) 128 Cal. App. 4th 116, 26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 723.

Holland America v. Wartsila North America, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1769.

Paradise Cruise, Ltd. v. Michael Else & Co. (United States District Court, District of Hawaii, 2005) 2005 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1572.

In re Air Crash at Taipei (United States District Court, Central District of California 2004) 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31075.

Fitzpatrick v. Arco Marine (United States District Court, Central District of California, 2001)199 F.R.D. 663, 2001 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1390.

Keith Whiteman v. Grand Wailea Resort (United States District Court, Northern District of California, 1999) 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3594.

Ross v. F/V MELANIE (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1998)1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 577.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 1997 AMC 2713.

Boykin v. Boeing (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 128 F.3d 1279.

Hunt v. Shipowner's Mut. Protection & Indem. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1997) 119 F.3d 6, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 26074.

Long v. M/V Melanie (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 918 F. Supp. 323, 1996 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 1341.

Johnston v. M/V Dieu Si Bon (United States District Court, Western District of Washington 1996) 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21522,1997 American Maritime Cass (AMC) 14.

Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of Washington, 1995) 1995 American Maritime Cases (AMC) 2625. 

Representative Matters

Hawai‘i Federal Court Dismisses Claims Against Local Defense Counsel

Joseph Francoeur (Partner-New York, NY), Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA), and Ronald Weiner (Of Counsel-New York, NY) obtained dismissal in defending a local Hawai‘i attorney in a significant ruling issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawai‘i. In this high-profile lawsuit, under litigation since 2018, brought by the plaintiff against a large Medical Center and several other Hawai‘i-based medical providers, donor organizations, and attorneys, the court dismissed the action, except for a potential claim against the plaintiff’s own counsel. The case stemmed from the 2016 death of the plaintiff’s daughter and subsequent organ donation procedures. The court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss, ruling that all claims were barred by the statute of limitations or otherwise legally insufficient. The court also issued an order to show cause, requiring the plaintiff to provide additional information to support her malpractice claim by October 20, 2025, or face dismissal of the entire case. With this ruling, all claims against the medical providers, hospital, donor organizations, government entities, and opposing counsel are concluded. The only remaining avenue for the plaintiff is to pursue a properly supported malpractice claim against her former attorney.

Joseph L. Francoeur, B. Otis Felder and Ronald W. Weiner

Felder: Hawai'i District Court Finds in Favor of Lloyd's as to Lack of Coverage over Construction Contract

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) obtained a ruling by the United States District Court for the District of Hawai'i in which the Magistrate Judge issued findings and a recommendation to grant Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, judgment against a construction company, confirming that there is no insurance coverage for claims related to a disputed construction project in Kauai. The ruling stems from allegations by homeowners regarding serious construction deficiencies in their custom retirement home. According to court findings, the insured’s insurance application contained material misrepresentations, failing to disclose known disputes and contractor defaults before the Lloyd’s policy was issued. The court also determined that coverage was barred for multiple independent reasons, including that the claims arose before the policy’s retroactive date; the allegations involved construction activities that were outside the scope of the covered “business activities" as defined by the professional liability policy covering design work; and other policy exclusions applied for workmanship, breach of contract, and known claims. If adopted by the district judge, the ruling will relieve Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s from any duty to defend or indemnify the insured in connection with the project. The recommendation now moves to the district court for final approval.

B. Otis Felder

Felder and Patillo Obtain Favorable Ruling for Jet Ski Rental Company in Wrongful Death Case

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) and Jonathan Patillo (Associate-Las Vegas, NV) obtained a favorable ruling from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, which denied a motion for sanctions against our client jet ski rental company in a wrongful death lawsuit. The plaintiffs had sought spoliation sanctions, alleging that the rental company failed to preserve video footage related to a 2020 jet ski rental transaction. Wilson Elser was brought in after the original counsel failed to bring a limitation action in federal court. The court ruled in favor of the rental company, finding that the plaintiffs failed to establish a duty to preserve the footage at the time it was automatically deleted. Through their representation, Otis and Jonathan were able to show the court that the company acted properly and in good faith throughout this process. The denial of sanctions eliminates any adverse inference against the company and strengthens its defense as the case proceeds. The case also is significant in discussing the various standards with respect to preservation of evidence and issues concerning spoilation.

B. Otis Felder and Jonathan C. Pattillo

Felder and Turner Obtain Dismissals of Canadian Clients in U.S. Federal and State Courts

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) and Vladyslava Turner (Associate-Los Angeles, CA) obtained dismissals of prominent Canadian clients based on key issues concerning lack of personal jurisdiction and proper service under Hague Convention. 

  • In the first case., the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted a motion to dismiss against a Canadian ground handler, determining that the company lacked sufficient ties to California to justify personal jurisdiction. The plaintiff alleged that an employee of the ground handler contractor caused her injury at the Vancouver Port, but the court found that it was not bound by the forum selection clause in the cruise line’s passenger contracts. In addition, the plaintiff had failed to show she complied with properly serving the Canadian entity as required by the Hague Service Convention.
     
  • In the second case, the Los Angeles Superior Court granted a motion to quash service of summons as to two Canadian entities allegedly involved in sponsoring a virtual reality event where the plaintiff says he lost his balance and fell. The court ruled that the service of summons on these defendants in Canada failed to comply with the Hague Service Convention, rendering it invalid.

These rulings highlight the complexity of jurisdictional challenges in cross-border litigation and the necessity of adhering to proper legal procedures when attempting to bring Canadian defendants into U.S. courts.

B. Otis Felder and Vladyslava Victoria Turner

Felder Secures Dismissal of In Rem Proceedings and Vessel Arrest Warrant for Shipping Client in Maritime Action

Otis Felder (Partner-San Diego) prevailed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California for Wilson Elser’s shipping and trading company client. In this admiralty and marine matter, the court vacated an arrest warrant against the subject vessel and dismissed the associated in rem proceedings. The plaintiff in this case, a Dubai fuel supplier, alleged non-payment by our client for fuel supplied to the subject vessel, filing a verified complaint in rem against the vessel and obtaining an arrest warrant for it. Wilson Elser established that the fuel order was placed with another entity and, as such, the plaintiff was not entitled to a maritime lien – a requirement for the arrest. The plaintiff also failed to meet the three elements required under the Commercial Instruments and Maritime Liens Act (CIMLA). In addition, Otis submitted evidence that the plaintiff was paid in full but misapplied the amount to another account. The court concurred and found that the plaintiff failed to state a claim, dismissing the complaint without leave, vacating the arrest warrant, and consequently dismissing the in rem proceedings.

B. Otis Felder

Felder Prevails in Motion Gutting Damages Based on 1897 Maritime Precedent

Otis Felder (Partner-San Francisco) convinced the San Joaquin Superior Court in Stockton, California, to grant a motion in limine stating the effect of which “guts the case of its damages demand.” In this state court case, the plaintiff alleged that his recreational speed boat was negligently repaired by our client boat repair shop, demanding he was entitled to $1,500 per diem for 1,090 days of loss of use, amounting to $1,635,000. In response, the repair shop moved to exclude the damages based on a U.S. Supreme Court case, The Conqueror, 166 U.S. 110 (1897), which held that owners of recreational vessels intended for and used strictly for pleasure have no pecuniary loss arising from delay in repairs. The Stockton court pointed out that the plaintiff’s boat was registered for recreational use only and that the plaintiff had never rented or chartered another during the repairs. The court agreed that general maritime law, not California state law, controlled and that the Supreme Court’s decision applied. In The Conqueror, Frederick Vanderbilt, grandson of Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt, had sued to recover possession of his steam yacht that he alleged was illegally detained for failing to pay customs fees when he brought it to the United States from England. The U.S. Supreme Court held Vanderbilt’s claim for loss of use failed because he had no evidence of loss of profits and that the vessel was intended and was used only for personal pleasure. The state court noted that to the extent California law would allow loss of use damages, it would interfere with established federal maritime law and thus was preempted. It found that the plaintiff was precisely in the same position as Vanderbilt in 1897, as both boats were owned and used for personal pleasure only and not intended nor used commercially. Accordingly, it granted that no claims or references could be made at trial to loss of enjoyment or use of the recreational boat.

B. Otis Felder

Felder Obtains Dismissal of a Marina on a Demurrer

Otis Felder (Partner-San Francisco, CA) obtained dismissal of a marina on a demurrer sustained before the Shasta County Superior Court. In this case, plaintiff alleged he fell off the top deck of a houseboat where he had ventured during the night with a female companion (not his wife) before he had to turn himself in the next morning to serve a prison sentence. In his complaint, he alleged that a deck railing, which appeared perfectly safe, gave way when he leaned on it while engaging in a social activity. The co-defendant grandmother houseboat owner provided in her responses to interrogatories that she had not given the plaintiff permission to "recklessly have drunken intercourse on the roof of the houseboat." While the court denied judicial notice of the grandmother's testimony, it sustained the demurrer finding that generally one does not owe a duty to control another or to warn of endangerment by conduct of other. It stated an exception to this "no-duty-to-protect" rule exists for cases in which the defendant has a special relationship with either (1) the dangerous third party that entails an ability to control them (e.g., parents and children, colleges and students, employers and employees) or (2) the victim where the victim expects protection from the defendant. In this case, the court rejected that the defendant marina had the ability to control the houseboat owner with respect to maintenance of the railing and that there was no special relationship between it and the plaintiff. As no facts could be alleged to create such a relationship, the court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend.

B. Otis Felder

Felder Defends Yacht Broker; Ninth Circuit Joins Others in Limiting LOLA’s Single-Claimant Exception

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) in Live Life Bella Vita, LLC v. Cruising Yachts, Inc., defended claims against a yacht broker where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has made a significant ruling. As background, a prominent personal injury plaintiff counsel hired a diver to inspect his new yacht’s bow thruster. However, a crew member's action led to an unfortunate accident, causing injuries to the diver’s hands. A complex legal battle ensued, with the plaintiff counsel (as owner) initiating a proceeding under the Limitation of Liability Act (LOLA) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles. Subsequently, the diver filed a complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court and also made claims in the LOLA proceedings. The parties filed claims against others, including the yacht broker, for contribution and indemnity. The legal dispute intensified when the diver sought to stay the LOLA proceedings, claiming to be a "single claimant," a legal exception to proceeding in federal court. The district court agreed with the diver, but the vessel owner appealed. In a significant turn of events, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's ruling, stating that claims by others should be counted in assessing the single-claimant exception. This decision aligns with the approach of most other circuit courts considering similar issues. The ruling is crucial as it limits the single-claimant exception, allowing the federal court to address and resolve all claims in a comprehensive manner.  Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Mary H. Murgui wrote the opinion holding that claimants seeking contribution or indemnification are additional claimants rendering inapplicable the single-claimant exception under LOLA.

B. Otis Felder

Felder and Turner Obtain Summary Judgment on Superseding Cause Exonerating Jet Ski Rental Company in Multimillion-Dollar Wrongful Death Case

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) and Vladyslava Turner (Associate-Los Angeles, CA) secured summary judgment and exoneration for a jet ski rental company before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in San Diego. This significant victory stems from a wrongful death, survival and personal injury case resulting from an allision involving a rental jet ski operator and another jet ski, ultimately leading to the death one of the operators. In this case, the rental company initiated proceedings in federal court, seeking either exoneration or limitation of its liability to the value of the jet ski. Notably, the court ruled that as the case fell under its admiralty jurisdiction, federal general maritime law governed, and California state law could not supplement the issue of whether the renters had a contractual duty to defend the rental company. The court's decision highlighted that under admiralty law, the claimants failed to provide evidence supporting a claim for negligent entrustment, demonstrating that the rental company knew or should have known that one of the renters would recklessly use the rented jet ski contrary to their experience. The ruling also emphasized that the rental company was not required to warn of the evident dangers of operating a jet ski. Additionally, the court deemed the renters' intentional actions as a superseding cause, as their reckless operation, violation of navigation rules and terms of the rental agreement were unforeseeable as a matter of law. While the court exonerated the rental company from liability, it acknowledged that there were existing factual issues regarding whether the company would be entitled to indemnification for its defense expenses.

B. Otis Felder and Vladyslava Victoria Turner

Felder and Granata Prevail for Property Owner Against Commercial Tenant’s Contribution Claims in Subrogation Suit

Los Angeles partners Otis Felder and Valeria Granata obtained a good faith settlement order from the Los Angeles County Superior Court on behalf of a property owner and its property manager involved in a property damage subrogation lawsuit. The plaintiff, a subrogated insurer, sued a tenant, who then sued our clients along with their maintenance company for contribution,  to recover the $5.4 million in damages the plaintiff insurer paid to its insured, a medical office. The plaintiff sought reimbursement for water damages caused by another tenant in our client's building. Pursuant to the service agreement between our clients and the maintenance company, which contained an indemnity provision, the maintenance company accepted our clients' tenders and, after years of litigation, agreed to pay the plaintiff its $1 million policy limits coverage contingent upon the court granting a good faith settlement motion barring all claims against it and our clients. The tenant defendant seeking contribution objected to the settlement and maintained that the court should consider our clients' excess policies. The court disagreed, finding no evidence of any duty owed by our clients directly to the tenants considering anti-subrogation waivers in their leases and a failure to preserve evidence. The court further found that our clients' excess policies were not material to the determination. Otis and Valeria's arguments and skillful representation emphasize the significance of successful use of tenders, anti-subrogation waivers and indemnification provisions in resolving claims against Wilson Elser's clients without their having to contribute to the settlement.  

B. Otis Felder

Felder and Chu Obtain Summary Judgment under the Trivial Defect Doctrine

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) and Peter Chu (Associate-Los Angeles, CA) obtained summary judgment on behalf of a property owner and short-term property management company in a premises liability case where the plaintiff claimed $1.5 million in damages after tripping and falling on a concrete pathway in the property backyard. The plaintiff, an invitee on a rented property, filed a lawsuit claiming the owners were negligent in failing to properly maintain their vacation rental property. She had walked on the premises including the backyard when she arrived, and after returning from a boating trip while there was still light outside, she tripped and fell on her way toward the jacuzzi. The San Bernardino Superior Court granted summary judgment on the trivial defect doctrine, finding that the alleged dangerous defect was not significant given the differential in the height between two slabs in the backyard and other factors concerning the walkway. Alternatively, the court found that there was not a dispute in the evidence with respect to the two concrete slabs in the backyard, such that it was open and obvious to those who used the walkway.

B. Otis Felder and Peter Chu

Felder Aids in Overturning Limitation to Use of Liability Waivers in Hawai'i

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA), representing a nonprofit association of marina owners and operators as Amicus Curiae before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, assisted in obtaining a ruling overturning a prohibition against vessel owners' use of liability waivers in Hawai'i. The case arose from the plaintiff's wife's presumed death during a scuba and snorkeling tour off the coast of Maui, Hawai'i. Before the tour, the plaintiff and his wife signed a waiver releasing the vessel owner and operator from liability during the excursion. The federal district court in Honolulu struck the waiver as a defense by the vessel owners as to claims based on negligence as being void under section 30527(a) of Title 46, which prohibits certain liability waivers by owners regarding "vessel[s] transporting passengers between ports in the United States, or between a port in the United States and a port in a foreign country." In a 49-page opinion, the Ninth Circuit overruled the district court in deciding that vessel owners may use liability waivers, including in matters arising from a wrongful death admiralty action in Hawai'i. After finding it had appellate jurisdiction because the district court's order determined the rights and liabilities of parties in an admiralty proceeding, the Ninth Circuit held that the plain meaning of section 30527(a) does not apply to liability waivers as to vessels that transport passengers away from and back to a single port without stopping at any other port. The decision is highly significant to members of our client's association in permitting liability waivers, cruise lines and other marine operators around the country where their vessel leaves and returns to the same port.

B. Otis Felder

Felder Prevails before Ninth Circuit on behalf of Jet Ski Rental Company in Drowning Case

Otis Felder (Partner-San Francisco, CA) prevailed in representing a jet ski rental company before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in Sacramento was correct in resuming its exclusive admiralty jurisdiction with respect to negligent entrustment claims made by the mother of a rider who drowned. In this case, after the rental company, which owned the jet ski, initiated the federal limitation proceedings, the district court, pursuant to Admiralty Rule F, enjoined all other lawsuits arising from the accident. Initially, only the decedent's mother filed a claim in the limitation proceedings. She also filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the renters in California state court and asked the district court for permission to also proceed against the rental company. Initially, the district court lifted the stay but when the rental company was added to the state court action, the renters filed cross-complaints, which the district court then enjoined because it would interfere with its exclusive jurisdiction to determine the potential liability of the rental company. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held, in general, that a district court has broad discretion to dissolve and reinstate its injunction issued under Rule F and the Limitation of Liability Act (LOLA), but it must allow the mother to proceed in state court against other defendants who are not entitled to protection under the LOLA. It found that the federal Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits a federal court from staying state court proceedings, except as authorized by Congress or where necessary to aid or protect its jurisdiction, prohibited the district court from enjoining the decedent's mother from proceeding against anyone other than the vessel owner, which is protected by the LOLA. In addition, the renters did not seek protection of the LOLA as charterers, to which the LOLA also applied, and did not participate in the appeal.

B. Otis Felder

Felder Secures Exoneration For Sports Rental Company Denying $20 Million Demand

Otis Felder (Partner-San Francisco) secured exoneration and the dismissal of all claims in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento, for Wilson Elser’s client, a sports equipment rental company. The plaintiff was injured while attempting to board an inboard ski boat after tubing when her future relative engaged the throttle, resulting in a severe foot injury for which the doctors recommended amputation. The vessel was owned and rented out by our client’s company.

Otis petitioned the federal court to limit our client’s liability to the value of the vessel or for exoneration from liability. The plaintiff, her daughter, her fiancé who rented the boat, and his daughter filed claims in the federal LOLA proceedings and claimed damages in a companion state court filing, which the federal court stayed. Otis pursued enforcement of the indemnity provisions in the rental contract against the renter, including the express duty by the renter to defend. The federal court approved the dismissal of all the claims and issued an order exonerating the rental company. The state court claims were also dismissed, with Wilson Elser’s client avoiding a last demand of $20 million.
 

B. Otis Felder

Felder and Turner Obtain Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Suit

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles, CA) and Vladyslava Turner (Associate-Los Angeles, CA) obtained summary judgment in a case where the plaintiff/workman fell from a roof and sued our client property owner and property manager claiming an unsafe condition. Following his five-story fall, the workman was hospitalized for months and, although he received workers’ compensation benefits, claimed millions of dollars in medical expenses, loss of income, and pain and suffering. The case was originally removed to federal court then voluntarily dismissed only to be re-filed in state court, adding defendants, to prevent federal jurisdiction. After filing for summary judgment based on the Privette Doctrine, a judicially created prohibition against suing a property owner when an employee of an independent contractor suffers an injury during the course and scope of work, Vlada and Otis convinced the LA Superior Court that the plaintiff could not meet his burden in this case as the uncontroverted testimony showed that the edges of the roof had no protective parapet and presented an open and obvious risk of which the plaintiff's supervisor and employer should have been aware. The court agreed finding there was no evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims. The Court noted that when a person or organization hires an independent contractor, the hirer presumptively delegates to the contractor the responsibility to do the work safely. Once the presumption arises, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether one of the exceptions to the Privette Doctrine applies, and if it cannot, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment. 

B. Otis Felder and Vladyslava Victoria Turner

Felder and Granata Demurrer Sustained without Leave and Motion to Strike Granted

Otis Felder (Partner-Los Angeles | San Diego) and Valeria Granata (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) defended a golf course management company against allegations it was negligent as well as strictly liable for trespass and nuisance in allowing water, silt and soil to cause a flood on the plaintiffs’ property. The state court granted the plaintiffs trial preference based on their advanced age but sustained a demurrer on the basis that they failed to make a proper showing of a "taking" required as part of an elder abuse claim that would have entitled them to recovery of attorney fees. While the San Diego Superior Court found that the plaintiffs were correct that the right to use their property is contained in the "bundle" of property rights that can be taken, they did not allege the existence of a taking. The court also struck allegations against the property owner as to the same causes of action and found that they had improperly tried to add them as defendants without seeking leave to amend. Upon the court finding plaintiffs could not recover attorney fees under the elder abuse statute, the case was resolved.

B. Otis Felder

Privacy Settings
Your Privacy Choices
We value your privacy. Under privacy laws in your jurisdiction, you have the right to control how your personal information is used, including the right to opt out of the “sale” or “sharing” of your personal information for cross-context behavioral advertising. You may also limit the use of your sensitive personal information.

Below, you can review and adjust your cookie and data sharing preferences. For more information about how we use your data, please see our Privacy Policy.

Your Rights and Choices

Opt Out of Sale or Sharing: You may opt out of the sale or sharing of your personal information for advertising and analytics purposes by turning off Advertising & Targeting Cookies. We will honor your choice and will not sell or share your personal information for these purposes unless you enable these cookies again. Wilson Elser does not sell or share personal information in any other manner.

Limit Use of Sensitive Personal Information: If we collect sensitive personal information, you may limit its use to only what is necessary to provide requested services by adjusting your preferences here. Please contact privacy@wilsonelser.com with any questions.

Global Privacy Control: We honor browser-based opt-out signals, such as the Global Privacy Control (GPC). If we detect such a signal, your opt-out preference will be automatically applied.

These cookies are essential for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually set in response to actions made by you, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in, or filling in forms.

These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalization. If you do not allow these cookies, some or all of these services may not function properly.

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They may be set through our site by us or our analytics partners to understand your interests and deliver more relevant content to you. If you do not allow these cookies, we will not know when you have visited our site