US Judge Dismisses $5M Detention Lawsuit
A United States federal judge has dismissed a 5 million dollar lawsuit filed against the federal government over a 36-day Coast Guard detention at sea. The interdiction near St. Thomas involved a vessel whose master claimed BVI nationality, prompting extended diplomatic clearance before detainees were brought ashore. The court ruled that maritime law does not allow damages for emotional distress without physical injury.
A United States federal judge has dismissed with prejudice a 5 million dollar civil lawsuit against the federal government concerning the prolonged at-sea detention of a man held by the US Coast Guard following a major maritime drug interdiction. The incident originated on June 16, 2022, when US Coast Guard officers intercepted a vessel approximately 25 nautical miles off the coast of St.
Authorities observed the occupants tossing roughly 30 packages overboard, three of which were recovered and contained around 90 kilograms of cocaine, with prosecutors estimating the full cargo could have approached 900 kilograms. Following the interdiction, Nibbs and two other individuals were held at sea for 36 days.
The extended detention occurred while US officials worked through formal diplomatic channels involving the British Virgin Islands and the United Kingdom, as the vessel's master had claimed BVI nationality. Once British authorization was granted, Nibbs was brought ashore in Puerto Rico and presented before a federal magistrate judge on July 22, 2022.
During his time aboard Coast Guard cutters, Nibbs reported enduring severe hardship. Court records indicated he was restrained on deck under a tarp, exposed to sun, rain, and sea spray, fed mostly rice and beans, and required to use a hose for bathing alongside an open deck toilet with minimal privacy.
He subsequently sought 5 million dollars in compensation, citing emotional pain, psychological trauma, and mental anguish. In granting summary judgment in favor of the US government, US District Judge María Antongiorgi-Jordán described the 36-day delay as extraordinarily long and acknowledged the extraordinary discomfort Nibbs faced.
However, the judge ruled that under governing maritime law, claims for negligent infliction of emotional distress require evidence of physical impact or immediate danger of physical harm. Because Nibbs did not allege physical injury or imminent threat of physical assault or life-threatening deprivation, the court concluded that existing maritime statutes provide no legal avenue for financial recovery.
The civil dismissal comes after Nibbs was separately reindicted and convicted on federal maritime drug-trafficking charges.
Primary source: VINO