Bank of America N.A. v. Pacific Lady

2001 AMC 727 (2000)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Bank of America N.A. v. Pacific Lady

United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
2001 AMC 727 (2000)

AR

Facts

Alaskan Observers, Inc. (Alaskan) (plaintiff) sought to establish that its maritime lien against the Pacific Lady (defendant) had priority over maritime-lien claims by other parties. Federal law provided that preferred maritime liens had priority over all other types of maritime liens. A preferred maritime lien included a maritime lien based upon unpaid “wages of the crew of the vessel.” Under federal law, certain fishing vessels had to have observers on board. Alaskan provided the observers for the Pacific Lady. Federal regulations explicitly provided that it was unlawful for an observer to be required to cook, stand watch, or do other duties associated with the processing of fish. Alaskan believed Pacific Lady owed Alaskan money for providing the observers. Pacific Lady responded that the observers were not members of the crew covered by the Federal Maritime Lien Act, so any lien for the observers’ pay would not receive priority.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Pechman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 834,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership