ELR Citation: ELR 21184
No(s). 93-1616-Civ-T-17C (M.D. Fla. Feb 18, 1994)

The court holds that plaintiff class action members' failure to present their claims for removal costs or damages resulting from an oil spill to the responsible parties before bringing suit, as required by Oil Pollution Act (OPA) §1013(a), requires dismissal of their action, even though plaintiffs claimed that defendants advertised the wrong address after the claim center had moved. The court first holds that presentation of claims to the responsible party is a condition precedent for bringing suit under OPA §1013(a). Defendants did not violate the advertising requirement or obviate the presentation of claims requirement of the OPA by moving the claims office, because notice was provided to representatives of the potential class, telephone, and fax numbers did not change as a result of the move, and the new address was published in the newspaper the day after the move. The court then holds that it lacks diversity jurisdiction over the supplemental state-law claims because complete diversity does not exist between all named plaintiffs and defendants. Moreover, even if the court were to disregard the Florida residency of the nondiverse defendant because he is a nominal party, plaintiffs have not alleged that each putative class member independently meets the amount in controversy requirement. The court thus declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state-law claims.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Dominick J. Graziano
Hearne, Graziano & Nader
201 E. Kennedy Blvd., Ste. 1125, Tampa FL 33602
(813) 222-8245

Counsel for Defendants
Carl R. Nelson
Fowler, White, Gillen, Boggs, Villareal & Banker
501 E. Kennedy Blvd., Ste. 1700, Tampa FL 33601
(813) 228-7411