A FISHING BOAT AND ITS CAPTAIN WERE PROPERLY GRANTED FED. R. CIV. P. 56(C) SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A PASSENGER'S PERSONAL INJURY LAWSUIT BASED ON INJURIES INCURRED WHEN THE BOAT WAS STRUCK BY A "ROGUE" WAVE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE CAPTAIN'S RES

MCRAE B. SOUTHARD, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAUL LESTER; OREGON INLET FISHING CENTER, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 230
January 7, 2008, Decided

PROCEDURAL POSTURE Appellant passenger sought review of a decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, which granted Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) summary judgment in favor of appellees, a fishing boat and its captain, in his negligence lawsuit seeking recovery for personal injuries sustained when a wave struck the boat. The passenger also sought review of the district court's denial of his motion to alter or amend the judgment.

OVERVIEW: Before the boat reached the fishing grounds, the captain saw a large wave. He slowed down as quickly as possible, but the captain could not avoid the wave. When the boat struck the wave, it caused the passenger to be lifted out of his seat and sustain serious injuries. In granting summary judgment for appellees, the district court found that the Pennsylvania Rule, requiring a ship to show that its fault was not one of the causes of a collusion, did not apply, and that there was no evidence that the captain breached his duty of care when he failed to avoid the "rogue" wave. On appeal, the court upheld the district court's ruling, agreeing that the Pennsylvania Rule did not apply because there was no collision, since only one boat was involved, and that the record evidence concerning the timing and formation of the "rogue" wave and the captain's response to it did not create a genuine issue of material fact warranting a trial. Due to the court's conclusions regarding the summary judgment ruling, it further found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to alter or amend the judgment.

OUTCOME: The court affirmed the district court's decision.

Bookmark:      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at del.icio.us      Digg A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Digg.com      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Spurl.net      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Simpy.com      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at NewsVine      Blink this A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at blinklist.com      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Furl.net      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at reddit.com      Fark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Fark.com      Bookmark A%20FISHING%20BOAT%20AND%20ITS%20CAPTAIN%20WERE%20PROPERLY%20GRANTED%20FED.%20R.%20CIV.%20P.%2056%28C%29%20SUMMARY%20JUDGMENT%20IN%20A%20PASSENGER%27S%20PERSONAL%20INJURY%20LAWSUIT%20BASED%20ON%20INJURIES%20INCURRED%20WHEN%20THE%20BOAT%20WAS%20STRUCK%20BY%20A%20%22ROGUE%22%20WAVE%20BECAUSE%20THERE%20WAS%20NO%20EVIDENCE%20THAT%20THE%20CAPTAIN%27S%20RES at Yahoo! MyWeb