Kirby Inland Marine v. Sanchez, No. 23-20312 (5th Cir. 2024)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 23-20312 Document: 86-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/14/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED March 14, 2024 No. 23-20312 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal, Petitioner—Appellee, versus Daniel Sanchez, Claimant—Appellant, Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C., Claimant—Appellee, _____________________________ In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal, Petitioner—Appellee, versus Michael Randolph, Case: 23-20312 Document: 86-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/14/2024 Claimant—Appellant, Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C., Claimant—Appellee, _____________________________ In the Matter of Kirby Inland Marine, LP, Owner of M/V Sabinal, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability Kirby Inland Marine, L.P., Owner of M/V Sabinal, Petitioner—Appellee, versus David Hayes, Claimant—Appellant, Intercontinental Terminals Company, L.L.C., Claimant—Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC Nos. 4:21-CV-2965, 4:21-CV-2966, 4:21-CV-2967 ______________________________ Before Wiener, Haynes, and Higginson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. 2 Case: 23-20312 Document: 86-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/14/2024 No. 23-20312 Claimants-Appellants Daniel Sanchez, Michael Randolph, and David Hayes (the “Seaman-Claimants”) appeal the district court’s order denying their motion to lift the limitation stay imposed by the Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, 46 U.S.C. § 30511(c). The Seaman-Claimants argue that Claimant-Appellee Intercontinental Terminals Company’s (“ITC”) claims against Petitioner-Appellee Kirby Inland Marine, LP (“Kirby”) are invalid and thus ITC’s refusal to enter stipulations consistent with our decision in Odeco Oil & Gas Co., Drilling Division v. Bonnette, 74 F.3d 671 (5th Cir. 1996) is not an impediment to lifting the stay. However, the district court has never ruled on the validity of ITC’s claims against Kirby; in fact, the SeamanClaimants’ motion to dismiss those claims remains pending. We therefore REMAND for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to expeditiously consider the Seaman-Claimants’ motion to dismiss in the first instance, and we retain jurisdiction over this limited remand pending the district court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss. See United States v. Gomez, 905 F.3d 347, 356 (5th Cir. 2018). After that court’s ruling, this appeal shall return to the same panel. This case is REMANDED FOR LIMITED CONSIDERATION CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION. 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.