The case involved claims by Henry Marine and crew members of the tugboat Dorothy J for a marine salvage award after the vessel assisted the Staten Island Ferry Barberi following its allision with a pier in 2003. The court had previously granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on their entitlement to a salvage award but, after a bench trial, reconsidered that ruling based on a fuller record of the tugboat's actual role and contributions. The decision held that reconsideration was permitted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) prior to final judgment, as trial evidence had clarified whether the services achieved a sufficiently useful result under the 1989 Salvage Convention to support an award. Core reasoning emphasized that post-trial fact development justified revisiting the threshold entitlement issue and that plaintiffs had presented relevant evidence on the measure of success obtained.
This case concerns the ongoing implementation of a $1.25 billion class-action settlement against Swiss banks for assets belonging to Holocaust victims and their heirs. The court approved adjustments to the presumptive values used for Swiss bank accounts whose records had been destroyed, authorizing additional payments to qualifying members of the Deposited Assets Class who lacked documentation of exact account balances. The ruling relied on new analyses by experts such as Helen Junz showing that earlier presumptive values, derived from Volcker audit data on known accounts from 1933-1945, had understated average balances, with updates to categories like savings and custody accounts based on surviving records and statistical comparisons. The court retained jurisdiction over the claims resolution process administered by the Claims Resolution Tribunal to facilitate these distributions from the settlement fund.
The case Tummino v. Torti involved plaintiffs challenging the FDA's denial of a citizen petition and related applications to make the emergency contraceptive Plan B available over the counter without age restrictions or with restrictions starting at age 16. The court determined that the FDA's decisions were arbitrary and capricious because they resulted from unreasonable political delays, implausible justifications, and significant departures from the agency's standard procedures for switching drugs to non-prescription status. It vacated the denial of the citizen petition and remanded the matter to the FDA for reconsideration. The court also ordered the FDA to permit Plan B to be sold without a prescription to 17-year-olds within 30 days, citing sufficient scientific data on safety and the time-sensitive nature of the drug.
This case arose from the 2003 Staten Island Ferry collision, in which the tugboat Dorothy J and its crew provided immediate assistance to the damaged ferry owned by the City of New York. Henry Marine and crew member Robert Seekers sought a salvage award, arguing their services qualified as marine salvage beyond their existing contract with the City. The court granted summary judgment in part, awarding salvage for the spontaneous post-collision aid rendered before any City order but denying it for subsequent services performed after the City directed the tug to stabilize the ferry under the contract terms. The reasoning centered on the distinction between voluntary salvage efforts and contractual obligations, noting that the later work was routine tug operations already compensated and directed by the City. Seekers was not entitled to a separate award for the contract period because the tasks aligned with his regular duties without exceptional risk or difficulty.
This case arose from the October 15, 2003 crash of the Staten Island Ferry Andrew J. Barberi into a maintenance pier, which killed eleven passengers and injured many others. The City of New York petitioned to avoid liability or limit it to the value of the ferry in this admiralty proceeding. After a bench trial on stipulated facts, the court denied the petition and held the City liable. The core reasoning was that the City breached its duty of care by violating its own rule requiring both the captain and assistant captain to be present in the pilothouse while the vessel was underway; the assistant captain became incapacitated due to fatigue without a second pilot present, and this failure was a substantial factor in causing the collision.
In this case, non-parties Sam Chan and Ray Yim objected to disclosing their Social Security numbers during depositions in a civil lawsuit between Entral Group International, LLC and YHCL Vision Corp. The district court reviewed a magistrate judge's denial of their requests to withhold or redact the SSNs. The court granted the motions, holding that the significant privacy interests associated with SSNs outweigh the plaintiff's minimal showing of need for the information to identify the individuals or serve process. The reasoning drew on concerns about potential misuse of SSNs, references to the Privacy Act of 1974, and precedent emphasizing that disclosure should not be routine in discovery without a substantial particularized need.
