A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM INVOLVING PLACEMENT OF VESSELS, IN WHICH THE BROKER CLAIMED A BROKERAGE FEE DID NOT “AFFECT MARITIME COMMERCE” AND THEREFORE WAS NOT SUBJECT TO ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION.
Tankship International, LLC, Plaintiff, v. El Paso Merchant Energy-Petroleum Co. and El Paso Corp., Defendants
Civil No. 3:04cv753 (JBA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24509
April 28, 2006, Decided
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: In a case arising from an alleged breach of a maritime brokerage contract, defendant charter companies moved to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff broker pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1333.
OVERVIEW: The complaint alleged that the broker offered to secure the placement of seven vessels into vessel pools and also stated that it would be willing to offer its services as an operational liaison between all the parties to facilitate communication and distribution of information relating to the operation of the vessels during the period the vessels operated in the pool. In granting the motion to dismiss, the court found that the broker's written proposal concerning the vessel pool did not address the issue of operational liaison services but merely suggested a brokerage commission to the broker. The complaint and supplementary evidence could not be fairly read to assert or support the existence of any agreement between the broker and the charter companies for ongoing provision of operational liaison services beyond facilitating communication and distribution of information relating to the operation of the vessels while they operated in the pool. In substance, the case was one for breach of contract in which the broker claimed a brokerage fee. Such a case did not "affect maritime commerce," and, therefore, was not subject to admiralty jurisdiction under § 1333.
OUTCOME: The court granted the motion to dismiss.
