KEVIN BROWN, APPELLANT,
v.
BETTY K. AGENCIES (USA) LLC, APPELLEE
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.
Kevin Brown appealed the dismissal of his negligence and breach of contract claims against Betty K. Agencies arising from damage to a crane truck during loading onto a cargo vessel. The court affirmed dismissal based on the one-year statute of limitations in the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), holding that COGSA applied by operation of law once loading operations commenced.
COGSA's one-year statute of limitations applies and bars the action as time-barred. Once the truck was fitted with slings and hooked to the ship's crane for loading, COGSA became applicable by operation of law, and Betty K. as the carrier's agent properly asserted the limitations defense.
[1] The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) applies to damage occurring during the loading of goods onto a vessel.
[2] A one-year statute of limitations applies to claims governed by COGSA.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Once the truck crane was fitted with slings and hooked up to the ship's crane, COGSA became applicable by operation of law.”
Establishes that COGSA's protections and time limitations apply once loading operations commence, not merely upon actual placement aboard the vessel
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn September 7, 2006, Brown's crane truck was taken to the dock for shipment to the Bahamas. As the ship's crane lifted the truck for loading, it was …
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 Bill Of Lading Interpretation cases and more on FLexlaw
Kevin Brown (“Brown”) appeals an order granting a motion for summary judgment in favor of Betty K. Agencies (“Betty K”) and dismissing the cause of action with prejudice. We affirm as the action is time-barred under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (“COGSA”).
Brown contracted with Betty K. for the shipment of a single crane truck from Miami to the Bahamas. On September 7, 2006, the proposed date of sailing, the crane truck was taken to the dock, pulleys were attached and the crane truck was lifted by the ship’s crane for loading aboard the vessel. In the process of loading, the truck was dropped by the ship’s crane and was damaged. Brown brought suit on January 25, 2008, approximately sixteen months after the incident, alleging breach of the shipping contract and negligence. Betty K. asserted that the one-year statute of limitations barred the action under COGSA. Betty K. moved for summary judgment based on the one-year statute of limitations contained in COGSA. Brown contended that the truck was never loaded onto the ship and that Betty K. was a mere freight forwarder, not a carrier, and therefore COGSA did not apply.
The agreement here is governed by the bill of lading. The bill of lading states that Betty K. was the forwarding agent and also states that the bill of lading is subject to the provisions of COGSA. The record facts demonstrate that Betty K. was the contracting agent for transport of the truck crane and that the damage to the truck crane occurred while it was being loaded onto the carrier. Once the truck crane was fitted with slings and hooked up to the ship’s crane, COGSA became applicable by operation of law. Since Betty K, as the agent of the carrier, rightfully asserted the statute of limitations to bar the negligence claim for the alleged negligence that occurred upon loading, the one-year statute of limitations period applies, and Brown is precluded from bringing the action, as being time-barred. See Neutax, S.A. v. Global Freight Servs., No. 02-21943-Civ., 2002 WL 31962180 (S.D.Fla. Oct. 25, 2002) (holding that COGSA applies in relation to the loading, handling, storage, carriage and discharge of goods); Birdsall, Inc. v. Tramore Trading Co., Inc., 771 F.Supp. 1193 (S.D.Fla.1991) (holding that carrier’s agent was not es-topped from asserting the one-year limitations period of COGSA).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fed. Contracting, Inc. v. Bimini Shipping, LLC, 128 So. 3d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)…lorida Supreme Court and this Court have both held COGSA section 1303 to be a statute of limitation. See, e.g., King Ocean Cent. Am., S.A v. Precision Cutting Sens., Inc., 717 So. 2d 507, 510, 513-14 (Fla.1998); Brown v. Betty K. Agencies (USA) LLC, 61 So. 3d 1156, 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). Federal courts opining on the distinction have noted that there are certain similarities between COGSA section 1303 and statutes of repose, but have still continued to call it a limitation period. See, e.g., Senicios-Expo…
-
Mauricio Importadora Y Exportadora v. JET Speed Logistics (usa), LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…ides the exclusive remedy for the claims in the underlying action. Additionally, the one-year statute of limitations period applies and Mauricio is precluded from bringing the action as being time- barred. See Brown v. Betty K. Agencies (USA) LLC, 61 So. 3d 1156, 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s entry of directed verdict in favor of Jet Speed. Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Birdsall, Inc. v. Tramore Trading Co., Inc., 771 F. Supp. 1193 (S.D. Fla. 1991)