## Facts

- Managers of three vessels, including the M/V GOLDEN PRINCE, retained Murphy, Rogers & Sloss, APLC (MRS) in March 1998 to address crewmember wage and penalty-wage claims.
- Crewmembers arrested two vessels, including the GOLDEN PRINCE, to enforce their wage claims.
- MRS performed legal work that led to settlement of the wage claims and release of the seized vessels.
- MRS accrued about $136,000 in fees and disbursements from March 1998 to January 1999, which remained unpaid.
- In January 1999, other creditors arrested the GOLDEN PRINCE, and the district court consolidated multiple in rem creditor actions.
- The Royal Bank of Scotland held a preferred ship mortgage on the vessel.
- MRS intervened and asserted its attorney-fee claim as a maritime lien for “necessaries” under 46 U.S.C. § 31342, claiming priority over the bank’s mortgage.

## Issues

1. Whether legal services that secured a vessel’s release from arrest and facilitated settlement of crewmember wage claims qualify as “necessaries” under 46 U.S.C. § 31342.
2. If not, whether the law firm nonetheless holds a maritime lien with priority over a preferred ship mortgage in the vessel’s sale proceeds.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court.
- Legal services of the type provided by MRS were not “necessaries” under 46 U.S.C. § 31342.
- Because MRS provided no “necessaries,” it held no maritime lien on the vessel or its proceeds.
- Without a maritime lien, MRS’s claim could not take priority over the Royal Bank of Scotland’s preferred ship mortgage.

## Legal Principles

- Under 46 U.S.C. § 31342, a maritime lien arises only for providing “necessaries” to a vessel on the order of an owner or authorized person.
- “Necessaries” are construed in line with established maritime usage and generally cover goods and services closely tied to a vessel’s operation, maintenance, or keeping the vessel fit for its maritime function.
- Courts construe maritime liens strictly because they operate as non-possessory, non-recorded encumbrances that can prejudice mortgagees and other parties.
- Professional services such as litigation and settlement work, even if economically beneficial and related to removing legal impediments to operation, are not treated as “necessaries” absent clear statutory direction.
- A party that lacks a maritime lien under § 31342 cannot obtain priority over a preferred ship mortgage in distribution of sale proceeds.

## Conclusion

The court held that attorney services used to resolve wage litigation and secure a vessel’s release from arrest do not constitute “necessaries” under the Federal Maritime Lien Act; therefore, the law firm had no maritime lien and could not defeat the priority of the vessel’s preferred ship mortgage.


Gulf Marine & Industrial Supplies, Inc. v. M/V Golden Prince, 230 F.3d 178 (5th Cir. 2000)