Thorsteinsson v. M/V Drangur
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
891 F.2d 1547, 1990 AMC 2478 (1990)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
The M/V Drangur (defendant) was an Icelandic cargo vessel owned by an Icelandic corporation. Olafur Thorsteinsson and Bergthor Havardsson (plaintiffs) were seamen on the ship. Certain Icelandic creditors filed claims against the M/V Drangur in Icelandic court. The Icelandic court had jurisdiction over the vessel under Icelandic law but did not arrest the vessel. After various legal proceedings, Utvegsbanki Islands HF (the bank) (defendant) purchased the M/V Drangur in a judicial auction and thereby obtained title to it, purportedly free and clear of all liens. When the vessel was in Florida, however, Thorsteinsson and Havardsson brought an in rem action against the M/V Drangur in federal district court to assert various maritime liens against the ship for unpaid wages and other claims. The district court ordered the arrest in rem of the vessel, and it was seized. The bank appeared before the court as the owner of the vessel and posted a cash bond to secure its release. The bank moved for summary judgment, arguing that the court was required to recognize the Icelandic court’s sale of the vessel to the bank free of liens. The court granted the motion, and Thorsteinsson and Havardsson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fay, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.