Tanguis, et al v. Westchester MV, et al

In the United States Court of Appeals
For the Fifth Circuit
_______________
m 02-30197
_______________
ALICIA TANGUIS, ETC., ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
ALICIA TANGUIS,
ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA;
DONALD F. MANKIN, JR.,
ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA;
GEORGE A. BARISICH,
ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA;
MEDRIC MEYER,
ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA;
PRESTON SALTALAMACCHIA,
ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
VERSUS
WESTCHESTER M/V, ET AL.,
Defendants,
WESTCHESTER M/V
AND
ERMIS MARITIME CORPORATION,
Defendants-Appellees.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
IN THE MATTER OF:
MARINE OIL TRADER 3 LIMITED,
AS OWNER OF M/V WESTCHESTER PETITIONING FOR
EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY;
TRITON MARINE, S.A.,
AS MANAGER OF M/V WESTCHESTER PETITIONING FOR
EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY;
ERMIS MARITIME CORPORATION,
AS MANAGER OF M/V WESTCHESTER PETITIONING FOR
EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
MARINE OIL TRADER 3 LIMITED,
AS OWNER OF M/V WESTCHESTER;
TRITON MARINE, S.A.,
AS MANAGER OF M/V WESTCHESTER;
ERMIS MARITIME CORPORATION,
AS MANAGER OF M/V WESTCHESTER,
Petitioners-Appellees,
VERSUS
ISTVAN ABONYI, ET AL.,
Claimants.
_________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
m 01-CV-3559-N
_________________________
December 10, 2002

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and
EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This is a putative state class action that was
subsumed, on removal to federal court, by a
limitation of liability action. The appellants as-
sert error in the district court’s dismissal of
potential claims. We have read the briefs and
the applicable law, have heard the arguments
of counsel, and have consulted pertinent por-
tions of the record.
Because the limitation of liability action ter-
minates appellants’ status as asserted class rep-
resentatives, appellants have no standing to
pursue this appeal on behalf of potential claim-
ants. Because of the lack of standing, we have
no jurisdiction over the appeal.
The appeal, accordingly, is DISMISSED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has deter-
mined that this opinion should not be published and is
not precedent except under the limited circumstances
set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

-- 3 of 3 --