## Facts

- Gowen, Inc. provided wharfage and repair services to the fishing vessel F/V Quality One, owned by Nunya, Inc.
- Gowen sued in federal district court asserting a maritime lien for necessaries and seeking in rem relief against the vessel and in personam relief against the owner.
- The vessel was arrested under a warrant authorizing seizure of the vessel and its equipment, engines, and appurtenances.
- Nunya did not appear; the court entered default and a default judgment establishing liability.
- Gowen moved for an order to sell the vessel and requested that the sale include the vessel’s federal fishing permits and fishing history as appurtenances; no opposition was filed.
- The court ordered a public sale including any valid fishing permits and history to the extent permitted by applicable law.
- At the auction, the vessel’s captain told attendees that the sale was being challenged and that permits would not transfer; bidding was limited and the winning bid was $17,000.
- After the sale, Nunya challenged confirmation, arguing (1) the permits and history were not appurtenances subject to the lien and sale, and (2) the price was unfairly low due to chilled bidding.
- The district court confirmed the sale, and Nunya appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a maritime lien for necessaries and an in rem arrest of a vessel extend to federal fishing permits and fishing history as “appurtenances” that may be sold with the vessel.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion in confirming the judicial sale where the sale price was allegedly grossly inadequate and bidding was allegedly chilled.
3. Whether the owner’s failure to object before the sale barred its post-sale challenge.

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed the order confirming the sale.
- The court held that the vessel’s federal fishing permits and fishing history were properly treated as appurtenances included within the in rem sale, subject to applicable regulatory limits on transfer.
- The court held that the sale price was not shown to be grossly inadequate and that the district court acted within its discretion in confirming the sale despite the captain’s discouraging statements.
- Although the court noted the owner’s delay and lack of pre-sale objection, it resolved the principal questions on the merits rather than resting solely on waiver or laches.

## Legal Principles

- A maritime lien for necessaries may attach to a vessel and its appurtenances; appurtenances are not limited to physical items if an item is closely tied to the vessel’s ordinary commercial operation and value.
- Federal fishing permits and associated fishing history may qualify as appurtenances when they are integral to the vessel’s ability to operate profitably and materially contribute to the vessel’s market value.
- A judicial sale may include permits and similar interests only to the extent permitted by applicable law; sale orders may incorporate that limitation to avoid conflict with regulatory transfer rules.
- Confirmation of an admiralty judicial sale is reviewed deferentially; a court may decline to set aside a sale absent a showing such as gross inadequacy of price or a process defect warranting relief.
- Courts weigh finality and bidder reliance in judicial sales, particularly when the challenged terms were expressly included in the sale order and not timely contested.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit upheld confirmation of an in rem sale of a fishing vessel and held that federal fishing permits and fishing history could be treated as appurtenances subject to a maritime lien and included in the sale, while finding no abuse of discretion in confirming the $17,000 auction price.


Gowen, Inc. v. F/V Quality One, 244 F.3d 64 (1st Cir. 2001)