No. 25-46
Boat Santa Rita II, Inc. v. Magnus Aadland
Response Waived
Tags: court-of-appeals maintenance-and-cure maritime-law punitive-damages standard-of-review vessel-owner
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2025-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
Under the general maritime law of maintenance and cure, what standard governs the award of punitive damages where a vessel owner provides maintenance and did the Court of Appeals below err in applying that standard?
Did the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit err in finding that Petitioner Boat Santa Rita II, Inc. breached its duty to provide cure and acted in a manner warranting punitive damages?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What standard governs the award of punitive damages under general maritime law for maintenance and cure, and did the Court of Appeals err in applying that standard?
Docket Entries
2025-09-26
Joint stipulation to dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 46.1 filed by petitioner.
2025-09-26
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2025-07-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-07-16
Waiver of right of respondent Magnus Aadland to respond filed.
2025-06-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 13, 2025)
Attorneys
Boat Santa Rita II, Inc.
Joseph Arthur Regan — Regan & Kiely LLP, Petitioner
Magnus Aadland
Scott Wesley Lang — Lang, Xifaras and Bullard, Respondent
Andrew Benedict Saunders — Saunders & Saunders, LLP, Respondent
Catherine Beth Kramer — Lang, Xifaras and Bullard, Respondent