Lee Brother, LLC v. Crowley Liner Servs., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46449 (S.D. Miss. June 26, 2007).

Sarah Spigener, 3L, University of Mississippi School of Law

In a negligence action brought by Lee Brother, LLC, against Crowley Liner Services (“Crowley”) for damage caused to its business property during Hurricane Katrina, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi held that Crowley had no duty to take additional measures, beyond reasonable measures, to secure its property from damaging plaintiff’s property.

Background
Crowley operated a cargo company at the Port of Gulfport. At 4:00 p.m. on Friday, August 26, 2005, the National Hurricane Center changed its forecast for the landfall of Hurricane Ka­ trina to include the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Im­ medi­ ate­ ly after this forecast, Crowley began making arrangements for its customers to retrieve or move their car­ go containers from the Port prior to the storm’s landfall. Crowley then decided, as it had in preparation for previous hurricanes, to block stow the remaining containers and equipment on its terminal. Block stowage is the arrangement of cargo in a given space to provide stability and strength. The process was completed after the mandatory evacuation of the Port at 1:00 p.m. on Sunday, August 28.
      The plaintiff, Lee Brothers, owned business property approximately .75 mile from the Mississippi Gulf Coast in Gulfport, Mis­ sis­ sippi. During the hurricane on the morning of August 29, one of Crowley’s shipping containers damaged the plaintiff’s property. The plaintiff filed suit alleging that Crow­ ley acted negligently by failing to timely remove or secure its storage con­ ­ tainers before Hurricane Katrina made landfall.

Analysis
Summary judgment is only appropriate when there is no genuine issue of material fact to be decided by a jury. In order to determine if there was a genuine issue of material fact, the court examined the elements of the plaintiff’s negligence claim. In order to prove a claim of negligence, the plaintiff must show (1) that the defendant had a duty to protect others against an unreasonable risk of harm; (2) the defendant breached that duty, (3) the harm was reasonably foreseeable; and (4) harm actually occurred.
      The court held that Crowley owed a duty to property owners in close proximity to the Port to take reasonable measures to prevent its shipping containers from washing away during a storm. Evidence presented by Crowley established that block stowing requirements are found within several United States marine terminal hurricane contingency plans, block stowage is typically reliable and greatly minimizes potential damage and loss, and there had never been a separation of the block stow from its facility in the United States or the world prior to Hurricane Katrina. The court held that the measures taken were reasonable under the circumstances because the defendant could not reasonably have foreseen that the extraordinary force of Hurricane Katrina would wash its containers ashore damaging neighboring property. Crowley was, therefore, not required to take additional measures to secure the storage containers.
     
Conclusion
The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant after concluding that the Lee Brothers failed to prove that Crowley had breached its duty to protect neighboring property owners from damage caused by its shipping containers during Hurricane Katrina.