Filed: May 02, 2018
Latest Update: May 02, 2018
Summary: ORDER REGARDING MAINTENANCE ALAN C. KAY , Senior District Judge . Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's writ of mandamus, Plaintiff Barnes is entitled to an award of maintenance at the rate of $34 per day, subject to a potential upward modification after trial. Barnes v. Sea Hawaii Rafting, LLC, ___ F.3d ___, 2018 WL 1870090, at *18 (9th Cir. Mar. 28, 2018). 1 In its analysis, the Ninth Circuit stated: Finally, we note that under the district court's view of Hall, an injured seaman would
Summary: ORDER REGARDING MAINTENANCE ALAN C. KAY , Senior District Judge . Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's writ of mandamus, Plaintiff Barnes is entitled to an award of maintenance at the rate of $34 per day, subject to a potential upward modification after trial. Barnes v. Sea Hawaii Rafting, LLC, ___ F.3d ___, 2018 WL 1870090, at *18 (9th Cir. Mar. 28, 2018). 1 In its analysis, the Ninth Circuit stated: Finally, we note that under the district court's view of Hall, an injured seaman would b..
More
ORDER REGARDING MAINTENANCE
ALAN C. KAY, Senior District Judge.
Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's writ of mandamus, Plaintiff Barnes is entitled to an award of maintenance at the rate of $34 per day, subject to a potential upward modification after trial. Barnes v. Sea Hawaii Rafting, LLC, ___ F.3d ___, 2018 WL 1870090, at *18 (9th Cir. Mar. 28, 2018).1
In its analysis, the Ninth Circuit stated:
Finally, we note that under the district court's view of Hall, an injured seaman would be faced with a Hobson's choice: He could either stipulate to the reasonableness of the rate supported by the shipowner's evidence and thereby give up the possibility of proving a higher rate at trial, or he could decline to do so, in which case he would not receive payments for basic living expenses until after trial. Id.
It is remarkable that in its review of the District Court's extensive ongoing efforts to resolve the amount of maintenance to which Plaintiff Barnes is entitled, the Ninth Circuit was apparently unaware that back in 2013—nearly five years ago—the District Court proposed a stipulation to the parties under which they would stipulate to a maintenance rate of $30 per day, subject to further adjustment should either party demonstrate at trial that the rate should be higher or lower; and that Defendant Henry agreed to the proposed stipulation but Plaintiff Barnes would not so agree. See Order Denying Plaintiff's Third Motion for Summary Judgment for Payment of Maintenance, ECF No. 120 at 3 n.2, 12.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
