JAMES O'NEILL, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES T. SCHOENBROD, THE YACHT "ANDIAMO", AND THE UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the unjust enrichment claim was a disguised salvage claim, over which the state court had already declined jurisdiction.
Plaintiff's complaint for unjust enrichment arising from boat salvage was dismissed. This claim was previously dismissed as a salvage action due to ex…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Salvage Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
HUBBART, Judge.
This is an appeal from the dismissal of a complaint sounding in unjust enrichment arising from the salvage of a boat approximately two miles off the coast of Florida. This same claim had previously been filed as a salvage action and was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that a salvage claim is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal district court sitting in admiralty. On appeal, this court affirmed. O’Neill v. Schoenbrod, 355 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
We adhere to our prior decision and again affirm the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint as, in our view, it is nothing more than a disguised salvage claim over which we have declined to exercise jurisdiction. Indeed, a comparison between the first and second complaints herein reveal substantially the same allegations. We recognize that there may be technical differences between a salvage claim and an unjust enrichment claim arising out of the salvage of a boat, but regard these differences of gossamer strength and, for that reason, find it completely inadvisable to authorize the bringing of a kind of limited salvage claim under the heading of unjust enrichment. Such a ruling would, in our view, invite confusion and unnecessary state-federal jurisdictional conflict.
We further find no merit in the remaining contention raised by the plaintiff on this appeal. Insurance Company of North America v. Twitty, 319 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gilman Yacht Sales, Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank OF Chicago, 600 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…im incidental to an in rem proceeding, by permitting a quasi contract/unjust enrichment claim, would invite unnecessary state-federal jurisdiction friction and, therefore, the trial correctly declined to exercise jurisdiction. O’Neill v. Schoenbrod, 374 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Therefore, the summary judgment in favor of First National Bank of Chicago is affirmed in all respects. The summary judgment in favor of Ira Kaufman is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and this cause is remanded for furthe…
Authorities Cited
- Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Twitty, 319 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- O'Neill v. Schoenbrod, 355 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)