HM&B Succeeds on Motion for Summary Judgment for Marina Client

Szamier v. Cherry Cove, LLC and Lambs Yacht Center Operating Company, LLC,  No. 3:18-cv-01402-HES-JBT (M.D. Fla. September 25, 2020)

Bruce Szamier, a  yacht broker with close to 40 years of experience, went to inspect a vessel, a 2003 53’ Selene Ocean Trawler motor yacht (the “Vessel”), that was for sale and  moored at Lambs Yacht Center in Jacksonville, Florida.  Mr. Szamier coordinated his inspection with the Vessel owner’s yacht broker, who advised Mr. Szamier of the Vessel’s location at the marina and provided instructions related to the Vessel’s keys and electricity. Although Mr. Szamier passed multiple large signs at Lambs Yacht instructing him to check in at the front office before proceeding to any of the docks, he failed to notify anyone at Lambs Yacht of his presence.

Mr. Szamier, 77 years-old at the time, approached the Vessel which was moored bow in and tied at an angle in a covered “u-shape” dock.   Mr. Szamier testified he noticed there was a distance between the Vessel’s topsides and the dock, and that the tide was low.  He further testified there was approximately 2 feet between the dock and the Vessel’s cap rail, which was the closest distance between any point on the Vessel and the dock.  He testified the Vessel’s boarding door was approximately 4 feet lower than the top of the dock.  Mr. Szamier did not have, see or find any apparatus to help him board the Vessel.  Nevertheless, he attempted to board the Vessel by lying on his stomach on the dock and then lowering his body down backwards, feet first.  As he attempted this, he fell back onto the Vessel and landed on his left shoulder.  He was eventually diagnosed with a torn rotator cuff and a fractured humerus, which required surgical treatment. 

Mr. Szamier sued Lambs Yacht and the Vessel’s owner for negligence.  Mr. Szamier alleged Lambs Yacht 1) created a dangerous “boarding situation,” and failed to: 2) provide a reasonably safe working area; 3) discover a dangerous or hazardous condition; 4) warn of a dangerous condition or hazard, “i.e that the Vessel was inaccessible in a reasonably safe manner during low tide”; 5) provide Mr. Szamier with access to medical care; and 6) assist Mr. Szamier after he was injured.

Lambs Yacht moved for summary judgment asserting a dock owner has no duty under the general maritime law to provide access to a vessel, the purported “dangerous” condition was open and obvious, and the duty to provide medical care or assist Mr. Szamier never arose because Lambs Yacht had no idea Mr. Szamier was on its property, let alone injured.  The Court agreed with Lambs Yacht and granted its motion.  Specifically, the Court held: a marina has no duty to provide safe access to a vessel under the general maritime law; Lambs Yacht had no duty to warn of the Vessel’s access or lack thereof because it was open and obvious; there was no evidence presented regarding any issues with the dock itself to support Mr. Szamier’s “reasonably safe working area” claims (regardless of Lambs Yacht duty to furnish same); and that the undisputed evidence showed Lambs Yacht  had no knowledge of Mr. Szamier’s fall or injuries to trigger its duty as a landowner to provide aid or medical care.  The motion was written by HM&B partners Whittni M. Hodges and Jules V. Massee.