Pago Pago, AMERICAN SAMOA — A hearing is scheduled for next month at the federal court at Santa Ana, California on the motion to dismiss for “forum non conveniens”, in the wrongful death lawsuit of a fisherman who died after falling overboard while the US flagged purse seiner Cape Ferrat was dock at the Samoa Tuna Processors Inc., wharf in October last year.

Plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit over the death of Michael Castaneda are Maren MIller, personal representative of the beneficiaries and estate of Castaneda, and the deceased’s wife, Tracey Castaneda. They are the same plaintiffs in the similar lawsuit pending at the High Court of American Samoa. (See Samoa News edition Oct. 31st for the local lawsuit).

The federal court, according to court document, was first filed in March this year at the Los Angles County Superior in Los Angeles but was transfer to the federal court in June this year. Defendants include Cape Ferrat fishing vessel owner, Cape Ferrat Fishing Lp., along with Tri Marine Group’s five entities — such as Samoa Tuna Processors Inc., Samoa Fishing Mangement Inc.

Court documents show that a Dec. 17th hearing will be held before US District Court Judge Philip S. Gutierrez on identical motions filed by defendants to dismiss the case at the federal level for “forum non conveniens”.

According to the Legal Information Institution, housed at Cornell Law School in New York, “Forum non conveniens is a discretionary power that allows courts to dismiss a case where another court, or forum, is much better suited to hear the case (www.law.cornell.edu).

Attorneys for the defendants explain that the motion to dismiss is based on the grounds that American Samoa is an available and adequate forum that is more convenient for the parties and for adjudication of this case, which centers around events that took place exclusively in American Samoa.

Defendants contend that the wrongful death case should be litigated in American Samoa, where the death occurred, where all of the defendants will submit to jurisdiction, where the vast bulk of the evidence resides, and where plaintiffs are already prosecuting a parallel action.

“California has no interest in this suit or in the underlying events,” according to court documents which explained that the deceased was a Nevada citizen and was the captain of the Cape Ferrat, which claims Pago Pago, American Samoa, as a hailing port.

They alleged that the deceased had a .207 blood alcohol level when he died the night of  Oct. 28, 2017 when he fell into the water while boarding his ship at a wharf in Pago Pago after returning from dinner. It also notes that the Department of Public Safety had investigated the deceased death.

The defense explained that the common law doctrine of “forum non conveniens” provides the federal court with the ability to exercise its discretion to dismiss the case in favor of a more convenient forum.

“American Samoa is an available and adequate forum — all defendants agree to submit to jurisdiction there, all of plaintiffs’ claims can be adjudicated there, and plaintiffs will be able to seek remedy in its (American Samoa) courts,” they argued.

Additionally, plaintiffs have told the court in American Samoa that “if there is any case in the world that deserves to have the High Court of American Samoa involved, this is it.”

According to the defense, the only claims that plaintiffs allege in the federal suit but not in the parallel action are their Jones Act claims. But the High Court of American Samoa “has explicitly recognized its ability to determine Jones Act claims”.

“Plaintiffs’ are therefore not precluded from pursuing their Jones Act claims in American Samoa, which means that there is no reason not to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds here,” court documents points out.

Moreover, the applicable public and private factors both weigh very heavily in favor of dismissing this case in favor of American Samoa.

“Specifically, a vast majority of the evidence resides in American Samoa, trying the case in American Samoa will allow for a cost-effective and efficient trial, and American Samoa has significant interest in the outcome of this case—points which Plaintiffs’ counsel effectively conceded to the High Court of American Samoa at a recent hearing in Plaintiffs’ parallel action there,” the defense further argued.

Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ parallel action in American Samoa will require the same evidence that will be presented in the federal case, “and it makes little sense to compel that evidence and engage is entirely overlapping litigation in two forums”.

For these reasons, this Court should exercise its discretion and dismiss this case on forum non conveniens grounds, the defense noted.

The defendants have already denied the accusations in the federal case, in the plaintiffs alleged seven causes of action:

•    Wrongful Death Claim for Negligence under the Jones Act; Survival Claim under the Jones Act;  Wrongful Death Claim for Unseaworthiness under the General Maritime Law ; Survival Claim for Unseaworthiness under the General Maritime Law; and   Survival Claim for Unpaid Wages - against Cape Ferrat, Tri Marine Fish Company, Tri Marine Management Company, and Tri Marine Fishing Management LLC

•    and  Wrongful Death Claim under the Laws of American Samoa; and Survival Claim under the Laws of American Samoa - against Samoa Tuna Processors Inc., Samoa Fishing Management Inc.