Rule B Alter-Ego Vessel Seizures

摘要

Plaintiffs seeking to recover from ship managers or the vessels they 'operate but lacking a direct claim against a particular vessel have developed a clever strategy under U.S. maritime law. They, seize a managed vessel under Supplemental Admiralty Rule B and claim the vessel-owning company is an alter" ego of the defendant with whom the dispute really exists. In this way, plaintiffs can take advantage of the relatively low evidentiary bar to delve into protracted discovery to develop the alter-ego connection they need to prove up their case. Rule B requires showing that the defendant is not present within the district to satisfy the existence of general-personal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court's general jurisdiction ruling in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S.Ct. 746 (2014), has made it . much easier to meet "Rule B's requirement because it essentially requires the defendant's principal place of business to lie within the district, which is never the case for foreign flag vessels or their owning companies, thus enabling plaintiffs to almost automatically meet Rule B's "not present within the district" requirement.