BALTIMORE — In the wake of the catastrophic collapse of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge in March, a significant liability case is unfolding, with the companies behind the container ship Dali now attempting to shift blame to others.
During a court session on Tuesday, legal representatives for Singapore’s Grace Ocean Private Limited and Synergy Marine Group contended that Maryland officials bore some responsibility for insufficient protection measures against ship strikes. They introduced the argument that the shipbuilder may have installed malfunctioning electrical equipment, which could have contributed to the Dali losing power as it neared the bridge.
On the other side, attorneys representing numerous claimants pursuing damages maintained that the focus should remain on the alleged negligence of the two companies. Attorney David Reisman, who is advocating for the state of Maryland, emphasized that such defenses from the companies are premature in the litigation process.
Among the claimants are families of six construction workers who tragically lost their lives in the collapse, as well as local governments, businesses, and labor crews. They are alleging that Grace Ocean and Synergy inadequately maintained the Dali, overlooked persistent issues with its electrical systems, and knowingly allowed an unfit vessel to navigate Maryland waters.
Following the bridge collapse on March 26, the two companies promptly filed a federal court petition in Baltimore to limit their liability. Since then, around 50 other parties have initiated opposing claims related to the incident.
During a scheduling hearing on Tuesday, Judge James Bredar engaged attorneys from both sides to establish some organization in this complex case, which could potentially become the most expensive marine casualty litigation on record. He indicated that the primary objective is to guide the case towards a path that may lead to settlement, a process that could unfold over several years. An order regarding the initial phase of the case, including timelines and whether to narrow focus or broaden discussions to include third-party responsibility, is anticipated shortly.
William Bennett, representing Grace Ocean, asserted that the court should consider attributing “significant liability and fault” to state authorities, among others. He referenced extensive documentation indicating that Maryland has inadequately protected the bridge, which dates back to the 1970s and lacks sufficient safety measures.
The gallery in the courtroom was packed with attorneys involved in this extensive case. The discovery phase is expected to involve multiple lengthy depositions in the coming months, ultimately leading to a bench trial. It is possible that some federal claims might reach settlements sooner. Recently, Grace Ocean and Synergy agreed to pay in excess of $102 million for cleanup efforts following a claim by the U.S. Department of Justice, which will reimburse the federal funds spent to clear substantial debris from the Port of Baltimore, a vital shipping lane that remained closed for months post-collapse.
Following this settlement announcement, a representative for Grace Ocean specified that it should not be viewed as an acknowledgment of fault or wrongdoing.
The Justice Department claim, which has since been resolved, provided insight into the myriad breakdowns that left the Dali’s crew and pilots unable to avert the impending disaster. The complaint highlighted “excessive vibrations” onboard that were identified as a “known cause of transformer and electrical failure.” Instead of addressing this issue, crew members allegedly made temporary fixes.
As part of an ongoing criminal investigation into the events leading to the collapse, FBI agents boarded the Dali in April.
The Dali encountered a power failure while departing Baltimore, veering off its course and colliding with the bridge, leading to the fatalities of six roadwork crew members. Although the ship’s pilots managed to issue a last-minute mayday, allowing police to halt bridge traffic, there was no timely alert for the workers.
The incident disrupted commercial shipping operations in the Port of Baltimore, resulted in longer commutes for local drivers, and temporarily affected many longshoremen’s employment. Businesses relying on the bridge’s functionality are now bracing for long-lasting consequences, as indicated by various legal filings.
It is anticipated that this federal case will lead to additional lawsuits in Maryland state courts in the future.
