sea sport cruises inc

SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.

• Engineering District : Honolulu
• TSO Series Number : TS-5 Transportation Lines on the Atlantic Gulf and Pacific Coasts
• Principal Commodity List : PASSENGERS ONLY
• Area of Operation : MA'ALAEA HARBOR AND SURROUNDING AREA AND MOLOKINI
• Passenger : 1
• Vessels List : OCEAN LIBERTY
• Address 300 MAALAEA RD. SUITE 211 WAILUKU HI 96793
• Phone : 808-856-8314

Managed Vessel

Ocean liberty.

• Type : Excursion / Sightseeing Vessels
• Construction : Fiberglass

Related News [SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.]

Trinidad Government Hires Salvors to Recover Sunken Oil Barge

Trinidad and Tobago has hired two remediation and salvage firms to help clean up an ongoing oil spill off Tobago and salvage the leaking barge, the country's Ministry of Energy said on Tuesday.It has been almost two weeks since the oil spill was first discovered off Tobago's Atlantic coast after a barge ran aground on a reef.

Diana Shipping Orders Two Methanol Dual-fuel Bulkers

Greek shipowner Diana Shipping on Wednesday announced it has placed an order for two new methanol dual-fuel Kamsarmax bulk carriers from China's Tsuneishi Group (Zhoushan) Shipbuilding Inc.The 81,200 dwt newbuilds were ordered at a purchase price of $46 million each, Diana said. The vessels are expected to be delivered by the second half of 2027 and the first half of 2028, respectively.

Israeli-Linked Chemical Tanker Seized

Unidentified armed individuals have seized a tanker carrying a cargo of phosphoric acid in the Gulf of Aden on Sunday, the vessel's managing company and a U.S. defence official said.The incident, involving the chemical tanker Central Park, is the latest in a series of attacks in Middle Eastern waters since a brutal war between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas broke out on October 7.

Hanwha Ocean Lands $500M Deal to Build Four Very Large Ammonia Carriers

Hanwha Ocean has secured an order worth approximately $500 million to construct four very large ammonia carriers (VLACs) for Greek shipping company Naftomar Shipping and Trading Co. Ltd. Inc (Naftomar). Each VLAC will be able to transport 93,000 cubic meters (cbm) of ammonia, a carbon-free fuel, making them the largest vessel of their class in the world, Hanwha Ocean.

Insights: Frank Manning, President & COO, Diversified Marine, Inc.

Frank Manning has quickly risen through the ranks during his eight years in the shipyard business, today serving as president and COO at Diversified Marine, Inc. (DMI) in Portland, Ore. Crucial along the way has been a passion for the business itself and the people that make it all possible.“The first day I walked in a shipyard I knew that I was in the right industry,” Manning said.

Grounded Cargo Ship Refloated in the Caribbean

A cargo ship that ran aground off St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands earlier this month has been refloated and towed to a safe mooring location at the Crown Bay Sandfill dock, the U.S. Coast Guard said.Vessel owners and salvors will now coordinate further operations to remove the damaged cargo, remaining oil and conduct further salvage or repair operations for the Bonnie G.

Eastern Launches First Offshore Patrol Cutter USCGC Argus

The lead ship in the U.S. Coast Guard's Heritage-class Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) program, USCGC Argus (WMSM-915), was launched and christened during a ceremony at Eastern Shipbuilding Group's Nelson St. Shipyard in Panama City, Fla.Attended by more than 3,000 guests, the event featured a keynote address delivered by Admiral Linda Fagan, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard.

SEACOR Sells Its Inland River Business to Ingram

Fort Lauderdale, Fla. based SEACOR Holdings Inc. announced it has signed a definitive agreement to sell its inland river transportation and logistics business to Ingram Barge Company LLC, a division of Nashville-based Ingram Marine Group.Part of the SEACOR family of businesses for over two decades, Inland River Transport Holdings LLC (SCF) includes more than 1,000 covered dry cargo hopper barges

Arbitration Tribunal Delivers Verdict: Hanwha Triumphs in Deepwater Drillship Dispute

An arbitration tribunal has delivered a verdict in a drillship order cancellation case involving offshore drilling contractor Northern Drilling and Daweoo Shipbuilding Marine and Engineering (now known as Hanwha Ocean), ruling in favor of Hanwha.Billionaire John Fredriksen-owned offshore drilling company Northern Drilling canceled the West Aquila and West Libra drillship orders with South

MARAD Announces First Ships Enrolled in the Tanker Security Program

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) announced on Tuesday that nine ships have been enrolled in the Tanker Security Program (TSP), a newly created public-private partnership program that makes U.S.-flag commercial product tankers available to support U.S. armed forces and national economic security.

Cheniere Energy Returns Louisiana LNG Export Plant to Full Production

Cheniere Energy Inc's Sabine Pass LNG export facility returned to full production this week after undergoing maintenance, data from Refinitiv showed.The increased production is expected to help third quarter exports of U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) which fell in May to 7.66 million tonnes from a record 8.01 million tonnes in April, as plant maintenance curbed some output.

Eastern Shipbuilding Delivers New Hopper Dredge R.B. Weeks

Eastern Shipbuilding Group, Inc. (ESG) on Monday announced the delivery of R.B. Weeks, a 8,550 cubic yard capacity trailing suction hopper dredge constructed for Weeks Marine, Inc.“It’s our pleasure to once again deliver a quality vessel on time and on budget to our valued customers at Weeks Marine, Inc.,” said Joey D’Isernia, president of Eastern Shipbuilding Group, Inc. “The R.B.

• Log in/Sign up

SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.

• OLA ARTISAN PIZZA (trading name)
• PIZZA OLA (trading name)
• OLA PIZZA (trading name)
• PIZZERIA OLA (trading name)
• OLA PIZZERIA (trading name)
• MAUI ARTISAN PIZZA (trading name)
• WILD DOLPHIN ENCOUNTERS (trading name)
• CRUST (trading name)
• OCEAN SPIRIT (trading name)
• OCEAN NAVIGATOR (trading name)
• PIZZA WITH A PURPOSE (trading name)
• PORTO FLAME FIRED PIZZA (trading name)
• MAUI-LANAI FERRY (trading name)
• WILD DOLPHIN (trading name)
• PAC WHALE ECO ADVENTURES (trading name)
• PWF CRUISES (trading name)
• MA`ALAEA-LANAI FERRY (trading name)
• MAUI COUNTRY STORE (trading name)
• OCEAN ODYSSEY (trading name)
• OCEAN EXPLORER (trading name)
• ULTIMATE WHALEWATCH WITH THE EXPERTS (trading name)
• MAUI LEGENDS & LORE HISTORY CRUISE (trading name)
• LAHAINA LEGENDS & LORE HISTORY CRUISE (trading name)
• LANAI ADVENTURE CRUISE (trading name)
• LANA'I ADVENTURE (trading name)
• OCEAN LIBERTY (trading name)
• PACWHALE ECO ADVENTURES (trading name)
• EXCLUSIVE WHALE WATCH WITH THE EXPERTS (trading name)
• PWF ECO ADVENTURES (trading name)
• OCEAN CELEBRATION (trading name)
• PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION ECO ADVENTURE TOURS (trading name)
• NATURAL SELECTION CAFE AND CATERING (trading name)
• MAALAEA-MANELE FERRY (trading name)
• MAALAEA-LANAI FERRY (trading name)
• PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION'S ECO-ADVENTURES (trading name)
• PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION ECO ADVENTURES (trading name)
• OCEAN VOYAGER (trading name)
• CAFE BALENA (trading name)
• MAUI ARTISAN PIZZERIA (trading name)
• OLA CATERING (trading name)

Recent filings for SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.

Application for TN/TM/SM Assignment

Officer / Director Change

see all filings

Company Addresses

PO BOX 1632, KAHULUI, Hawaii, 96733

300 MAALAEA RD SUITE 211, WAILUKU, Hawaii, 96793

Latest Events

Corporate grouping user contributed, total shares, trademark registrations.

Problem/question about this data? Click here

For access please Log in / Sign up

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Dammeyer v. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc., No. 1:2022cv00442 - Document 80 (D. Haw. 2024)

Court Description: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF KEVIN B. DAMMEYER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT re 51 , 53 - Signed by JUDGE MICAH W.J. SMITH on 3/2 2/2024.  Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. Defendant Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Finally, Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.'s request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. (jni)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

Get free summaries of new District of Hawaii US Federal District Court opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

This docket was last retrieved on March 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER .

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

• Search for Party Aliases
• Associated Cases
• Case File Location
• Case Summary
• Docket Report
• History/Documents
• Related Transactions
• Check Status

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?

Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions .

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Drop us a line

For customer service, sales, warranty and parts related questions and/or concerns we can help you out or point you in the direction of your nearest Sea Sport Dealer .

• Name * First Name Last Name
• Your Location * City, State
• What can we help you with? * Customer Service Sales Warranty Parts Become a Dealer
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Handmade in the pacific northwest

Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. Salary

How much does sea sport cruises, inc. pay beta, sea sport cruises, inc. overview, for employer.

The trusted data and intuitive software your organization needs to get pay right.

Enhance your organization's compensation strategy with salary data sets that HR and team managers can use to pay your staff right.

Does your employee feel unfair treatment? See Our Pay Equity Suite can help you achieve and sustain pay equity with the true end-to-end solution.

View salary at Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. by Job Title BETA

The estimate average salary for Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. employees is around $72,640 per year, or the hourly rate of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. rate is $35. The highest earners in the top 75th percentile are paid over $82,688. Individual salaries will vary depending on the job, department, and location, as well as the employee’s level of education, certifications, and additional skills.

Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. Job Openings

What are some typical titles and locations for Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. jobs?

Pay ranges for the same job title may differ based on the location and the responsibilities, skills, experience, and other requirements for a specific job. To search for jobs in other locations, fill in the title and locations to begin your search.

Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. Locations and Average Salaries

The average salary of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. is $72,640 in the United States. Based on the company location, we can see that the HQ office of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. is in WAILUKU, HI. Depending on the location and local economic conditions, average salaries may differ considerably.

Companies Located Near Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.

Here are some other companies that are located close to Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. Click the company name to explore its salary ranges and a comparison with pay at Sea Sport Cruises, Inc..

Pay at Companies Similar to Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.

Here are some companies in the same or similar industry as Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. Select a company name to explore and learn more about other companies across the industry and to compare average salaries with those at Sea Sport Cruises, Inc..

Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. Comments and Reviews

Here's what people are saying about Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. Company reviews can provide helpful insights into the company culture, working conditions, benefits, compensation, and training opportunities in Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. They may also reveal information or provide tips on interviewing skill requirements, and other factors that could help when applying for a position at that company. Reviews may also highlight any negative aspects of a company that will help in evaluating it as a prospective employer.

• News & Trends
• Motor boats
• Motor boats with cabin
• Catamaran express cruiser
• Sea Sport, Inc
• Exhibitions

Catamaran express cruiser PACIFIC 3200 inboard flybridge 6-berth

Characteristics

9.8 m (32'01" )

Description

Other Sea Sport, Inc products

• Inboard express cruiser
• Cabin cruiser
• Outboard cabin cruiser
• Flybridge express cruiser
• Outboard walkaround
• Inboard cabin cruiser
• Hard-top cabin cruiser
• Fishing cabin cruiser
• Fishing walkaround
• 6-berth express cruiser
• Sport-fishing cabin cruiser
• 4-berth cabin cruiser
• Flybridge cabin cruiser
• Cruising-fishing walkaround
• 6-berth walkaround

• Northern Europe & Baltic Sea

Moscow: question for those who have gone from St Petersburg

By Wayfairers , August 22, 2019 in Northern Europe & Baltic Sea

Recommended Posts

I have read many of the threads that discuss whether or not Moscow is worth the expense and long day, especially when there are only 2 days in port.  I realize there are two strong opinions from people with one side saying it is worth it and the other side says stay in St Petersburg. We have decided to go Moscow on day 1 of our visit. 

So, those who have done the long trip to Moscow....did you go with the cruise ship or a private guide?   If a private guide, who and would you recommend them?  Did you take the train both ways or fly one direction?  

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

On 8/22/2019 at 9:28 AM, Wayfairers said: I have read many of the threads that discuss whether or not Moscow is worth the expense and long day, especially when there are only 2 days in port.  I realize there are two strong opinions from people with one side saying it is worth it and the other side says stay in St Petersburg. We have decided to go Moscow on day 1 of our visit.    So, those who have done the long trip to Moscow....did you go with the cruise ship or a private guide?   If a private guide, who and would you recommend them?  Did you take the train both ways or fly one direction?  

Been to Moscow several times. We have used the Sapsan both ways and have also flown both ways - never a combo of the train/plane. We enjoyed the Sapsan more than the flight. We have NOT travelled to Moscow when arriving by cruise ship so have no comment on your particular situation regarding a one day tour with only 2 days in St. Pete.  Good luck - hope the visit meets your expectations.

Thanks for the info.  Good to know you enjoyed the train more than the plane - I would expect we would too as flying is typically more hassle than taking the train.  

We decided to book the trip to Moscow with the cruise ship after learning that if we miss the train or plane we don’t get a refund in addition to missing Moscow.  And, I’ve had friends who’s ship missed the St Petersburg stop due to weather.

Moscow is a great city but I would rather spend all two days in St Petersburg. Some years ago we had almost a week there and still it doesn’t seem enough. We also had one day in Moscow and the journey arranged by the local travel agency was well organized and comfortable. In a view of time restrictions of the journey (we spent almost 8 hours on the train and just 6-7 hours in the city) one day in Moscow still felt a little rushed. Anyway, enjoy planning your trip and hope you have a great time in Russia!

Just make sure the day you are going to Moscow, it is not one of their holidays or even a day before a holiday.

Moscow is an amazing city but it is frustrating when Red Square is closed for parades, etc.... It is hard to determine when they close it but it is definitely closed for their holidays. When it is closed - you can only walk around the exterior of the square and look in.

Thanks!   I will check.  We are in Moscow May 16.  I know May 9 is a holiday. 

AngelDisney

I have 2 days in St. Petersburg and am thinking about this possibility. I think it’s hard to do this with 2 days. The first day will take longer time to go ashore because of the immigration process. The second day is not possible due to the early all abroad time. It seems that it’s only worth doing it if there are 3 days in St. Petersburg especially when a full day of touring in Moscow is preferred. 

1 hour ago, AngelDisney said: I have 2 days in St. Petersburg and am thinking about this possibility. I think it’s hard to do this with 2 days. The first day will take longer time to go ashore because of the immigration process. The second day is not possible due to the early all abroad time. It seems that it’s only worth doing it if there are 3 days in St. Petersburg especially when a full day of touring in Moscow is preferred. 

For 2 days - spend the time in St. Petersburg. There is so much to see there. Save this for a 2nd trip.

When we were in St. Petersburg we were also very interested in visiting Moscow. We were already in Russia why not visit as much places as we could, right? We used Anastasia Travel for our St. Petersburg tour and also asked them to include Moscow. They were very helpful and were very much willing to arrange a day trip to Moscow for us but they suggested we just stay in St. Petersburg since we only had 2 days. They were kind enough to explain that we would just waste time and money if me push through with the Moscow trip. We would spend more time on the train instead of using the time to explore and enjoy the sights. They were actually correct and we ended up enjoying a wonderful 2-day tour in St. Petersburg. I guess we'll have to go back to see Moscow and make sure to stay longer! 

angie7911922

When we went to St Petersburg we had the same dilemma. We decided not to go to Moscow and didn’t regret it one bit. There is so much to see! If you spend the 2 days in St Petersburg you can go and see Peterhof Palace on one of the days. We were on a Princess cruise and like flowslow, we booked our private tours with Katharina from Anastasia Travel.   This way we used our time to the fullest to see as much as possible at our pace with a personal guide. (We are not fond of the big group tours from the cruise lines).

9 hours ago, angie7911922 said: When we went to St Petersburg we had the same dilemma. We decided not to go to Moscow and didn’t regret it one bit. There is so much to see! If you spend the 2 days in St Petersburg you can go and see Peterhof Palace on one of the days. We were on a Princess cruise and like flowslow, we booked our private tours with Katharina from Anastasia Travel.   This way we used our time to the fullest to see as much as possible at our pace with a personal guide. (We are not fond of the big group tours from the cruise lines).

We have two days and decided only staying in SPB for both days. We are thinking of forming a private tour with other cruisers on another forum as the CC roll call for that cruise is so quiet. We are looking into Anastasia Travel as well. Very excited to go!

On 9/1/2019 at 8:09 PM, AngelDisney said: We have two days and decided only staying in SPB for both days. We are thinking of forming a private tour with other cruisers on another forum as the CC roll call for that cruise is so quiet. We are looking into Anastasia Travel as well. Very excited to go!

Great idea to form a small group!! Have a fantastic time and I am sure you wont regret that decision!! 

luvtravel88

I'm not sure about customs when coming in on a cruise ship. We were told that if we wanted to leave the ship, we would have to be on a tour, either a ships tour or private tour. I know we had to show our tour tickets at customs to be allowed to go further. We chose Alla tours and they were fantastic. We were docked in St. Petersburg for 3 days and we did go to Moscow on the Capsan train on the 2nd day. It was a VERY long day. We had to meet our group at 6:00am and were on the train at 7:00am. We arrived back at to our cabin at 1:30am the next day. It was a wonderful day and we're so glad we went but if we were in St. Petersburg for only 2 days, I probably wouldn't spend a day in Moscow. It is a 4 hour train ride each way, and if you need to be back to the ship to depart, it may not leave you much time in Moscow. The 8 hours we spent there, wasn't nearly enough. Traffic is horrible and we ended up getting off our bus and taking the subway to Red Square. Those 8 hours allowed us a tour of Red Square, which was phenomenal as well as a quick walk through GUM department store and a ride on the subway with several stops to see the mosaics, sculptures and chandeliers that are in the corridors of the subway stops.

But.....there is so much to see in St. Petersburg , the 2 days we spent there, were a whirl.

Whatever you decide to do, be sure you're in line to get off the ship before the ship arrives in port. We were in line an hour early and there were still about 20 people ahead of us. We found that the cruise ship allowed their tour groups to get off the ship first, so when we got to customs, the lines were outrageous. It took us about an hour in line and we were late starting our tour. I had organized the tour with Alla and had advertised it on our cruise forum here at Cruise Critic. There were 12 of us and we met up on the ship each morning and went through customs together so we all met the tour bus at the same time. That was very helpful!

The lines the first day were the worst and days 2 and 3 went much more quickly. Also, everyone was getting off the ship at the same time on Day 1, but tours met and left at different times on Days 2 and 3.

16 minutes ago, luvtravel88 said: . Whatever you decide to do, be sure you're in line to get off the ship before the ship arrives in port. We were in line an hour early and there were still about 20 people ahead of us. We found that the cruise ship allowed their tour groups to get off the ship first, so when we got to customs, the lines were outrageous. It took us about an hour in line and we were late starting our tour. ! The lines the first day were the worst and days 2 and 3 went much more quickly. Also, everyone was getting off the ship at the same time on Day 1, but tours met and left at different times on Days 2 and 3.

This is one of the reasons that we decided to use the cruise ship to go to Moscow our first day in St Petersburg. 

25 minutes ago, Wayfairers said: This is one of the reasons that we decided to use the cruise ship to go to Moscow our first day in St Petersburg. 

I believe that the ship tours to Moscow go via air, right?

Yes, as others have noted, there is MUCH to see in Saint Petersburg and in spending a week there one will barely scratch the surface - the same is true for Moscow.

It sounds like you want to get a "taste" of both cities - don't allow anyone to "throw water" on your plans as you best know what you want to do. You can always return for an extended visit.  😉

4 hours ago, dogs4fun said: I believe that the ship tours to Moscow go via air, right? Yes, as others have noted, there is MUCH to see in Saint Petersburg and in spending a week there one will barely scratch the surface - the same is true for Moscow. It sounds like you want to get a "taste" of both cities - don't allow anyone to "throw water" on your plans as you best know what you want to do. You can always return for an extended visit.  😉

No, our ship tour is going by train there and back unless I misread something.  You are right...we just want a taste of both cities.  In fact, that is what we get from all cruise port stops - just a taste.  We are never there long enough to the see the area completely.

2 hours ago, Wayfairers said: No, our ship tour is going by train there and back unless I misread something.  

Interesting - I thought that the ship tours flew to Moscow when in port for only 2 days. Hope you will post upon return and let us know how it went.

16 hours ago, dogs4fun said: Interesting - I thought that the ship tours flew to Moscow when in port for only 2 days. Hope you will post upon return and let us know how it went.

Double checked and it says we go to Moscow on the high speed train.   Come back the same way.   From all I’ve read it takes a little longer (ship to Moscow sites) to fly than to take the train.  

I've been thinking about that - and I might be wrong, but it seems to me an SPB-Moscow combo over a 3-day cruise is one of the few remaining cases where obtaining a full-fledged Russian visa actually makes sense (especially for families/groups and especially if one is willing to do some DIY trip planning). 

Just to make sure, though - for those staying on the ship, is there some kind of curfew, or are you able to come and go as you please?

4 minutes ago, napoxoguk said: I've been thinking about that - and I might be wrong, but it seems to me an SPB-Moscow combo over a 3-day cruise is one of the few remaining cases where obtaining a full-fledged Russian visa actually makes sense (especially for families/groups and especially if one is willing to do some DIY trip planning).    Just to make sure, though - for those staying on the ship, is there some kind of curfew, or are you able to come and go as you please?  

If you have a Russian visa there is no curfew - you may come and go as you wish. In fact, if you so choose, you can spend the entire time in the city (staying at a hotel in either Moscow or St. Petersburg) rather than returning to your ship each evening - but ONLY if you have a visa.

6 minutes ago, dogs4fun said: If you have a Russian visa there is no curfew - you may come and go as you wish. In fact, if you so choose, you can spend the entire time in the city (staying at a hotel in either Moscow or St. Petersburg) rather than returning to your ship each evening - but ONLY if you have a visa.

That is what my research shows too.  A quick google search showed the tourist visas for US citizens are $160.  I’m willing to pay for a tour rather than get the visa.  We’ve gotten most of the visas that are a pain to get and I’m tired of doing that. 

2 minutes ago, Wayfairers said: I’m willing to pay for a tour rather than get the visa

I understand. Ru visa process can be expensive and time consuming, especially if you live far away from one of the visa centers.

I'm just trying to come up with a reasonably conservative number - what can one realistically expect to pay for a mad 1-day Moscow dash if they go DIY.

For a regular SPB-only itinerary, visa doesn't seem to make sense - not only price-wise, but also from the standpoint of convenience - all the local operators have their itineraries down to a science.

With Moscow, though, it's not so clear-cut.

I found that most of the tour operators will give you a tour but no guarantee that you make it to Moscow because you will miss the train if debarkation is too slow.  I found one tour that offers a 2 day tour with a flight to Moscow day 1 and train back and St Petersburg day 2.   Seriously considered them.   I briefly thought about getting a visa and spending the night in Moscow but never priced everything out. If you look into that I would love to see what you find. Probably not for us though because I want to see some of both cities.  

2 hours ago, napoxoguk said: I understand. Ru visa process can be expensive and time consuming, especially if you live far away from one of the visa centers. I'm just trying to come up with a reasonably conservative number - what can one realistically expect to pay for a mad 1-day Moscow dash if they go DIY.

I have visited Russia multiple times. I received my latest 3 year visa in May and here are the associated costs:

Single/Double/Multiple entry visa, consular fee = $198

Visa Center Processing fee = $50

Total = $248   (this is your total if you apply in person at one of the 4 consulates located in the USA - since I don't live near a Russian consulate, I must use the more costly mail option)

SO ... here is what I actually paid:

Multiple entry visa, consular fee = $198

Visa Center Processing fee by mail = $120

Return shipping/handling fee = $35

Total = $353

Totally worth the fee as I spend multiple weeks in Russia yearly and prefer DIY - personally, I would not consider a visa if it was a one time visit via cruise.

So, for DIY, added to the visa expense, one must add the cost of the sapsan train (or flight), Moscow transportation (metro is great), food & associated entrance fees to the Kremlin (and whatever else one has the time/desire to visit).

FYI: There is a HOHO in both Moscow & St. Petersburg.

Okay, I think the diy budget might be something like ₽20,000 (about $300) per person. This includes:

Train tickets: ₽9000 (5+4); Kremlin+armory: 1700 (1000+700)

Boat ride:600

Meals: 3000 (1500 per casual meal)

Contingencies (Uber ride if needed, etc): 2500. 

It's based on a number of assumptions, so real-life mileage will vary - please let me know if you identify some glaring omissions or errors.

Assumptions:

Done on day 2 of three.

Good weather (lots of outside/walking time)

Earliest Sapsan to Moscow, overnight double decker from Moscow (no hotel stays)

Train tickets purchased at least 30 days in advance, economy for Sapsan and economy plus for the double decker (includes a bottle of water and a piece of gingerbread).

All group members are adults

Done on a day when the Kremlin, Red Sq, and other Moscow attractions are actually open.

Boat ride via watertrams-radisson.ru (the cheapest option with English audio guide)

Sample itinerary:

leave SPB on Sapsan 743a (5:30am), sleep on the train.

Arrive Moscow 9am

DIY Metro tour until 11am

Kremlin excursion (cathedral Sq, DIY) 11:30

Armory excursion (audioguide) 12:30 

Quick lunch (at GUM stolovaya or fast food chains at Manezhnaya sq) : 2 to 3pm.

Walk to Zaryadye boat pier via Alexander's garden, Red Sq, Zaryadye. Boats leave every 30 minutes. Route: Zaryadye- Gorky Park - luzhniki- Ukraina - turnaround - sparrow hills - Gorky Park. Time on board: 2 hrs. 

Gorky Park/muzeon (5:30 to 7:30). 

Head back (metro) towards red sq for evening walk/dinner (tverskaya-kamergersky-b.dmitrovka-metropol-nikolskaya area)

Need to be back at the train station by 10:30 to catch the 006aa train departing at 10:50. 

Back to SPB at 6:47 am.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

• Welcome to Cruise Critic
• New Cruisers
• Cruise Lines “A – O”
• Cruise Lines “P – Z”
• River Cruising
• Cruise Critic News & Features
• Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
• Special Interest Cruising
• Cruise Discussion Topics
• UK Cruising
• Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
• Canadian Cruisers
• North American Homeports
• Ports of Call
• Cruise Conversations

Announcements

• New to Cruise Critic? Join our Community!

Write Your Own Amazing Review !

Click this gorgeous photo by member SUPERstar777 to share your review!

Features & News

LauraS · Started 11 hours ago

LauraS · Started 12 hours ago

LauraS · Started Thursday at 03:31 PM

LauraS · Started Thursday at 02:21 PM

LauraS · Started Wednesday at 10:25 PM

• Existing user? Sign in OR Create an Account
• Find Your Roll Call
• Meet & Mingle
• Community Help Center
• All Activity
• Member Photo Albums
• Meet & Mingle Photos
• Favorite Cruise Memories
• Cruise Food Photos
• Cruise Ship Photos
• Ports of Call Photos
• Towel Animal Photos
• Amazing, Funny & Totally Awesome Cruise Photos
• Write a Review
• Live Cruise Reports
• Member Cruise Reviews
• Create New...

• Featured Decisions
• Latest Decisions
• Browse Decisions
• Advanced Search

DAMMEYER v. SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.

KEVIN B. DAMMEYER, Plaintiff, v. SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC. d.b.a. PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION ECO ADVENTURES, DOE DEFENDANTS 1-25, DOE CORPORATIONS, 1-25, DOE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 1-25, DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-25, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Hawaii. https://leagle.com/images/logo.png

March 22, 2024.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF KEVIN B. DAMMEYER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

MICAH W.J. SMITH , District Judge .

INTRODUCTION

In this maritime action, Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer sues for leg injuries...

Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

• Updated daily.
• Uncompromising quality.
• Complete, Accurate, Current.

Subscribe Now!

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

• No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Statement
• Corporate Social Responsibility

Dammeyer v. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.

Case summary, case details.

1:22-CV-00442

Pending - Other Pending

Personal Injury - Marine

U.S. District Courts

Hawaii District Court

Judge Details

Referral judge.

KENNETH J. MANSFIELD

Presiding Judge

DERRICK K. WATSON

Party Details

Kevin B. Dammeyer

Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. doing business as Pacific Whale Foundation Eco Adventures

Doe Defendants 1-25

Doe Corporations 1-25

Doe Government Agencies 1-25

Doe Partnerships 1-25

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff attorney.

Douglas Thomas Moore

Defendant Attorneys

Michael J. Nakano

Normand R. Lezy

Melissa T. Marushige

Shawn L.M. Benton

Court Documents

(#16) Joint REPORT of Planning Meeting by Kevin B. Dammeyer and Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. (Moore, Douglas) Modified on 12/6/2022 (eta). (Entered: 12/06/2022)

(#15) Scheduling Conference Statement by Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer. (Moore, Douglas) (Entered: 12/06/2022)

(#14) Scheduling Conference Statement by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 12/06/2022)

(#13) NOTICE of Appearance by Melissa T. Marushige on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Marushige, Melissa) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

(#12) NOTICE of Appearance by Shawn L.M. Benton on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Benton, Shawn) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

(#11) NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J. Nakano on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Nakano, Michael) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

(#10) Corporate Disclosure Statement by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Pacific Whale Foundation for Sea Sport Cruises, Inc... (Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 12/01/2022)

(#9) ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc..(Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 11/30/2022)

(#8) SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kevin B. Dammeyer. All Defendants. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. served on 11/7/2022.(Moore, Douglas) Modified on 11/10/2022 (eta). (Entered: 11/08/2022)

AO 399 Waiver of Service of Summons

AO 398 Notice of Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of Summons

Main Document

Memo from Clerk Re: Corporate Disclosures

(#5) Summons Issued as to Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. (eta) (Entered: 10/11/2022)

(#3) Corporate Disclosure Statement by Kevin B Dammeyer. (Moore, Douglas) (Entered: 10/10/2022)

Civil Cover Sheet

Docket Entries

Docket (#16) Joint REPORT of Planning Meeting by Kevin B. Dammeyer and Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. (Moore, Douglas) Modified on 12/6/2022 (eta). (Entered: 12/06/2022)

Docket (#15) Scheduling Conference Statement by Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer. (Moore, Douglas) (Entered: 12/06/2022)

Docket (#14) Scheduling Conference Statement by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 12/06/2022)

Docket (#13) NOTICE of Appearance by Melissa T. Marushige on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Marushige, Melissa) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

Docket (#12) NOTICE of Appearance by Shawn L.M. Benton on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Benton, Shawn) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

Docket (#11) NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J. Nakano on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. on behalf of Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.. (Nakano, Michael) (Entered: 12/05/2022)

Docket (#10) Corporate Disclosure Statement by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Pacific Whale Foundation for Sea Sport Cruises, Inc... (Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 12/01/2022)

Docket (#9) ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by Sea Sport Cruises, Inc..(Lezy, Normand) (Entered: 11/30/2022)

Docket (#8) SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kevin B. Dammeyer. All Defendants. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. served on 11/7/2022.(Moore, Douglas) Modified on 11/10/2022 (eta). (Entered: 11/08/2022)

Docket (#7) CIVIL Waiver of Service Packet ~ Notice to Parties Regarding Service Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Attachments: #1 AO 398 Notice of Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of Summons, #2 AO 399 Waiver of Service of Summons)(eta) (Entered: 10/11/2022)

Docket (#6) Order Setting Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 09:30AM on 12/12/2022 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE KENNETH J. MANSFIELD - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 10/11/2022. (Attachments: #1 Memo from Clerk Re: Corporate Disclosures) ATTACH THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND MEMO RE: CORPORATE DISCLOSURES MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT. (eta) (Entered: 10/11/2022)

Docket (#5) Summons Issued as to Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. (eta) (Entered: 10/11/2022)

Docket (#4) NOTICE of Case Assignment: Please reflect Civil case number CV 22-00442 DKW-KJM on all further pleadings. (eta) (Entered: 10/11/2022)

Docket (#3) Corporate Disclosure Statement by Kevin B Dammeyer. (Moore, Douglas) (Entered: 10/10/2022)

Docket (#2) Summons (Proposed) (Moore, Douglas) (Entered: 10/10/2022)

Docket (#1) COMPLAINT for Personal Injuries and Damages against All Plaintiffs Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AHIDC-2749272.), filed by Kevin B. Dammeyer. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Moore, Douglas) Modified on 10/11/2022 (eta). (Entered: 10/10/2022)

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Melissa T. Marushige

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:24-CV-00025 | 2024-01-17

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00345 | 2023-08-16

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00252 | 2023-06-14

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Shawn L.M. Benton

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00629 | 2023-12-27

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00431 | 2023-10-24

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Michael J. Nakano

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00479 | 2023-11-27

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Normand R. Lezy

U.S. District Courts | Personal Injury | 1:23-CV-00388 | 2023-09-20

Why is this public record being published online?

UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy . By continuing to use this website, you agree to UniCourt’s General Disclaimer , Terms of Service , Cancellation and Refund Policy , Privacy Policy , and Public Records Policy . If you do not agree with these terms, then do not use our website and/or services.

• UK & Ireland

How is this helpful for me?

• Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
• Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
• Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
• The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

• Browse cases
• United States District Court, District of Hawaii

Dammeyer v. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.

• ON OFF Text Highlighter

Report a problem

CIVIL 22-00442 MWJS-KJM

Micah W.J. Smith United States District Judge

Title 28 APPENDIX —FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE —RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS 1 — Summary Judgment

—Title 28 APPENDIXFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE — Need for Personal Knowledge

• Dammeyer v. Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. United States District Court, District of Hawaii Mar 22, 2024
• Subsequent References
• CaseIQ (AI Recommendations)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF KEVIN B. DAMMEYER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SEA SPORT CRUISES, INC.'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

In this maritime action, Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer sues for leg injuries he sustained after slipping and falling in a ship's engine room. Dammeyer and his employer, Defendant Sea Sport Cruises, Inc. (or “Sea Sport” for convenience), each now move for partial summary judgment as to certain claims.

The parties' motions fall short for the same general reason: there remain genuine disputes of material fact as to the claims on which they seek judgment as a matter of law. For that reason, the Court DENIES Dammeyer's motion and DENIES IN PART Sea Sport's motion. Because Dammeyer has conceded one aspect of Sea Sport's motion, however, that motion is GRANTED IN PART.

In addition to these motions for partial summary judgment, Sea Sport contends that Dammeyer's counsel has violated certain Local Rules and, consequently, should be ordered to pay attorney's fees and costs. The Court agrees that Dammeyer's counsel violated the Local Rules in certain respects. The Court DENIES Sea Sport's request for attorney's fees and costs, however, because it does not find on the current record that Dammeyer's counsel acted in bad faith.

A. Dammeyer's Claims

Dammeyer's complaint advances multiple claims for relief, but only two of his claims are at issue on summary judgment: (1) unseaworthiness and (2) failure to pay maintenance and cure. In these claims, Dammeyer contends that Sea Sport has breached its maritime obligations to provide a seaworthy vessel and to support injured seamen during their recovery from injuries sustained while in service.

The other claims are (1) Jones Act negligence, (2) negligent and reckless infliction of emotional distress, and (3) respondeat superior. ECF No. 1, at PageID.6-10 (Compl. ¶¶ 17-21, 26-31).

The claims arise out of injuries Dammeyer allegedly sustained after slipping and falling on a ship deck on or about October 16, 2019. As alleged in the complaint, Dammeyer was working as a captain of the Vessel Ocean Quest (the “Vessel”) at the time of the incident. ECF No. 1, at PageID.5 (Compl. ¶¶ 9-10). The Vessel is a commercial recreational excursion vessel owned and operated by Sea Sport. Id. at PageID.3-5 (¶¶ 7-8). At the time Dammeyer was injured, the Vessel had just returned from an excursion and docked at Lahaina Boat Harbor. Id. at PageID.5 (¶ 11). An engineer (or mechanic) on the Vessel informed Dammeyer that there was a fuel leak in the starboard engine deck. Id. at PageID.5-6 (¶ 12). Dammeyer inspected the engine room and discovered what he alleges were “multiple inches” of fuel on the floor. Id. at PageID.6 (¶ 13). While investigating the source of the fuel leak, Dammeyer stepped on the Vessel's “exhaust/muffler manifold,” which he alleges had a “well-worn” non-slip strip and “some fuel/liquid” on it. ECF No. 54-2, at PageID.284 (Decl. of Pl. ¶ 10). Dammeyer slipped and fell, “resulting in a protruding steel hose-clamp rod . . . penetrating his lower left leg.” ECF No. 1, at PageID.6 (Compl. ¶ 14). Dammeyer alleges that he sustained a “very large and deep laceration to his lower left leg and injury to his right knee.” Id.

Sea Sport says the correct term is a “water-lift muffler.” ECF No. 66, at PageID.442. To avoid unnecessarily resolving a semantic dispute, the Court refers to the equipment as a “muffler.”

B. The Parties' Motions for Partial Summary Judgment

Dammeyer's motion seeks summary judgment on his unseaworthiness claim. He argues that the Vessel's engine room and its equipment were not reasonably fit for their intended purpose as a matter of law because the muffler had a well-worn non-slip strip on it and a protruding hose clamp, and there was a fuel leak in the engine room, which created an unreasonably slippery condition. ECF No. 53-1, at PageID.273-74. In support of these factual propositions, Dammeyer relies largely on his own declaration. See ECF No. 54-2. Sea Sport opposes the motion, arguing primarily that the evidence does not establish two of the elements of unseaworthiness: unfitness and proximate causation. ECF No. 66, at PageID.441-49. Sea Sport also raises arguments challenging the admissibility of various exhibits on which Dammeyer's motion sought to rely.

For its part, Sea Sport moves for summary judgment on Dammeyer's claim for failure to pay maintenance and cure. See ECF No. 51. Sea Sport argues there is no convincing proof of a causal connection between Dammeyer's right knee condition and the October 16, 2019 incident, and that Dammeyer already reached maximum medical cure as to his left leg laceration. ECF No. 51-1, at PageID.192. To establish that there is no genuine dispute of material fact on causation as to the right knee, Sea Sport relies on the opinion of Dammeyer's treating physician, Charles Soma, M.D., as well as a retained expert, James F. Scoggin, III, M.D., who both opined that Dammeyer's right knee injury is not causally connected to the October 16, 2019 incident but, rather, is a degenerative joint disease consistent with Dammeyer's age. Id. at PageID.196-200.

In response, Dammeyer concedes that his left leg already reached maximum medical cure, but he maintains that genuine disputes of material fact exist regarding the causal connection between his right knee injury and service as a seaman. ECF No. 64, at PageID.353-54. To substantiate that connection, Dammeyer principally relies on the opinion of his own retained expert, Scott McCaffrey, M.D., who opined that Dammeyer sustained structural damage to his right knee while climbing out of the engine room on October 16, 2019, and “subsequently developed mechanical knee pain due to asymmetric weight bearing” and compensatory inflammation. Id. at PageID.360; ECF No. 65-3, at PageID.377-81, 391-92. Sea Sport counters that Dammeyer's expert's opinion is inadmissible and, in any case, is insufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact on causation because Dammeyer improperly relies on Dr. McCaffrey's opinion to prove facts for which he is not a percipient witness, and because the opinion of the treating physician controls as a matter of law. ECF No. 68, at PageID.487-90.

Dr. McCaffrey represented that he developed his opinion after physically examining Dammeyer and reviewing Dr. Scoggin's report and other records. ECF No. 65-3, at PageID.376; ECF No. 65-4, at PageID.406-07.

The Court held a hearing on the parties' motions for partial summary judgment on March 13, 2024. ECF No. 78.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Summary judgment is warranted where a movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a) . The central inquiry is “whether the evidence presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a [trier of fact] or whether it is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 251-52 (1986).

The party seeking summary judgment bears the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of any genuine disputes of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). If the moving party makes that showing, the burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to “come forward with specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. , 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (cleaned up). In asserting whether a fact is genuinely disputed, a party must cite to “particular parts of materials in the record” or show “that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1) . All reasonable inferences must be drawn in favor of the non-moving party. Matsushita Elec. , 475 U.S. at 587 ; see also Barnes v. Sea Hawaii Rafting, LLC , 889 F.3d 517, 538 (9th Cir. 2018).

A. Dammeyer Is Not Entitled to Judgment as a Matter of Law on Unseaworthiness

This Court first addresses Dammeyer's motion for summary judgment on his unseaworthiness claim. For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that Dammeyer is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on that claim.

The doctrine of unseaworthiness is a type of strict liability under which a shipowner owes an absolute duty to furnish a seaworthy ship to seamen. Ribitzki v. Canmar Reading & Bates, Ltd. , 111 F.3d 658, 664 (9th Cir. 1997) (citing Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc. , 362 U.S. 539, 549 (1960)); see also Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki , 328 U.S. 85, 94-95 (1946). “A seaworthy ship is one reasonably fit for its intended use.” Ribitzki , 111 F.3d at 664 (citing Mitchell , 362 U.S. at 550 ). To prove unseaworthiness, Dammeyer must establish four elements: “(1) the warranty of seaworthiness extended to him and his duties; (2) his injury was caused by a piece of the ship's equipment or an appurtenant appliance; (3) the equipment used was not reasonably fit for its intended use; and (4) the unseaworthy condition proximately caused his injuries.” Id.

Here, Sea Sport disputes only the last two elements of unseaworthiness. See ECF No. 66, at PageID.441. The Court considers each in turn.

1. Under the third element of unseaworthiness, a seaman is entitled not to a perfect work space, but to one that is reasonably fit for its intended use. See Ribitzki , 111 F.3d at 664-65 . When the issue is slipperiness, a seaman is entitled to a work space that is not unreasonably slippery, such that an area of the ship is no longer reasonably fit for its intended use by the crew. Id. (citing Lieberman v. Matson Navigation Co. , 300 F.2d 661, 662 (9th Cir. 1962)). The mere temporary presence of water on a ship deck does not constitute unseaworthiness, for the shipowner is not an insurer. Lieberman , 300 F.2d at 662 . And a comparable analysis-calling for a consideration of reasonableness in relation to intended purpose-applies to other allegedly unseaworthy conditions.

In this case, Dammeyer argues there were three unfit conditions in the engine room: (1) the “well-worn” non-slip strip; (2) the protruding hose clamp; and (3) the “fuel on the exhaust/muffler manifold . ” See ECF No. 53-1, at PageID.273-74. As proof of those unfit conditions, Dammeyer relies almost exclusively on his declaration. His declaration states that the Vessel's mechanic informed him of a “significant” fuel leak in the engine room, and that when Dammeyer went to investigate it, he entered the room “by stepping on the exhaust/muffler manifold which had a well-worn yellow colored non-slip strip . . . and . . . some fuel/liquid on it.” ECF No. 54-2, at PageID.284. Dammeyer's foot slid, driving his leg “down between the muffler manifold and riser.” Id. A “hose clamp on the exhaust manifold with around 2.5 inches of excess metal, like a rod, projecting past its tensioning screw” entered his left leg. Id.

Sea Sport apparently does not dispute, at least at this stage, that there was liquid on the muffler, but it argues that the “mere momentary presence” of oil or another unidentified liquid does not “in and of itself render the vessel unseaworthy.” ECF No. 66, at PageID.443. And it argues that Dammeyer's conclusory statements about the conditions of the non-slip strip and hose clamp are similarly insufficient without evidence about what conditions would be reasonable under the circumstances. Id. at PageID.445.

The Court agrees with Sea Sport that Dammeyer's evidence does not conclusively establish this element. In essence, Dammeyer asks this Court to draw a number of inferences in his favor about, among other things, where the liquid on the muffler came from; what type of liquid it was; whether the “significant” amount of fuel or other liquid was unusual, not an ordinary incident to working in a ship's engine room; whether the protruding hose clamp was unreasonable; and whether the non-slip strip was unreasonably worn down. See Pinto v. States Marine Corp. of Del. , 296 F.2d 1, 3-8 (2d Cir. 1961) (affirming the district court's jury charge that to find the vessel unseaworthy, the jury must find that the alleged condition of oil or grease at the time of the plaintiff's slip and fall was not a “phase in the normal progress of work in and about the engine room, but that oil and grease was permitted to accumulate in sufficient quantity” to render the vessel unseaworthy). It may well be that a reasonable factfinder could draw those inferences on this record. See, e.g. , Ribitzki , 111 F.3d at 665 (reversing the district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendant on unseaworthiness because the plaintiff produced evidence that the pit room was cramped and slippery, which was sufficient to permit a reasonable jury to find the room was unfit for the task of cleaning the shale pit). But it would not be appropriate for the Court to do so at this stage. Because Sea Sport is the nonmoving party as to unseaworthiness, the Court must draw all reasonable inferences in its favor-not Dammeyer's. See Matsushita Elec. , 475 U.S. at 587 .

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Sea Sport, genuine disputes of material fact remain regarding whether any of the three conditions alleged by Dammeyer rendered the equipment unfit for its intended purpose.

2. To satisfy the fourth element of unseaworthiness, Dammeyer would also have to establish that the unfit condition proximately caused his injuries as a matter of law. See Ribitzki , 111 F.3d at 664 . Proximate cause “is established by showing that the unseaworthy condition was a substantial factor in causing the injury.” Id. at 665 (citing Faraola v. O'Neill , 576 F.2d 1364, 1366 (9th Cir. 1978)).

Sea Sport contends that a genuine dispute of material fact remains as to proximate causation because Dammeyer has not established that any of the alleged conditions were unfit as a matter of law; hence, the Court cannot conclude that any specific unseaworthy condition was a substantial factor in causing his injuries. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Sea Sport, the Court agrees with Sea Sport that a genuine dispute of material fact remains regarding whether an unseaworthy condition-whether it be the fuel or other liquid, hose clamp, or nonslip strip-was a substantial factor in causing Dammeyer's injuries.

Because the Court cannot conclude that Dammeyer has established the elements of unfitness and proximate causation as a matter of law, the Court denies Dammeyer's motion for summary judgment on his unseaworthiness claim.

B. Sea Sport Is Entitled to Judgment as a Matter of Law with Respect to Maintenance and Cure of Dammeyer's Left Leg, but Not His Right Knee

Next, the Court considers Sea Sport's motion for summary judgment on maintenance and cure. For the reasons explained below, the Court concludes that Sea Sport is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on maintenance and cure of Dammeyer's left leg, but not his right knee.

1. As to Dammeyer's right knee, the question is whether the opinion of Dammeyer's retained expert, Dr. McCaffrey-who opined that Dammeyer's right knee injury is causally connected to his service as a seaman-is sufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact on the issue of causation.

“A claim for maintenance and cure concerns the vessel owner's obligation to provide food, lodging, and medical services to a seaman injured while serving the ship.” Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc. , 531 U.S. 438, 441 (2001) (citing Calmar S.S. Corp. v. Taylor , 303 U.S. 525, 527-28 (1938)). To establish entitlement to maintenance and cure, a “seaman need only prove that he ‘bec[ame] ill or . . . injured while in the service of the ship.'” Barnes , 889 F.3d at 538 (quoting Vella v. Ford Motor Co. , 421 U.S. 1, 3 (1975)). Under that broad standard, the shipowner's duty to pay maintenance and cure is generally not restricted to cases in which the seaman's employment is the cause of the injury. Calmar , 303 U.S. at 527 . It “encompasses any illness or injury which occurred, was aggravated, or manifested itself while the seaman was in the ship's service.” Davis v. Brunsman , 516 F.Supp.3d 1185, 1196 (D. Or. 2021) (cleaned up). Where a seaman's “illness or injury manifests itself after conclusion of [their] employment with the shipowner,” however, they are “not entitled to recover for maintenance and cure absent convincing proof of causal connection between the injury or illness and the seaman's service.” Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Minks v. AEP River Operations, LLC , No. 09-cv-543, 2012 WL 1142932, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 5, 2021)).

In this case, the record shows that Dammeyer's service as a seaman has ended, but it does not clarify when that service ended. The written submissions do not supply the answer. And counsel for Dammeyer could not provide the answer at the hearing on the parties' motions. Accordingly, because Dammeyer has not shown otherwise, the Court must assume that when Dammeyer's right knee injury was first noted in July 2020-nine months after he injured his left leg on the Vessel-Dammeyer was no longer in service as a seaman. It follows that Dammeyer must meet the “convincing proof of causal connection” standard, and indeed, both parties agree this standard should apply here. See id. ; ECF No. 64, at PageID.359-60.

The parties disagree as to whether Dammeyer has provided sufficient evidence to meet that standard. Sea Sport contends that Dammeyer has not presented such proof. ECF No. 51-1, at PageID.204-05. As a threshold matter, Sea Sport argues that the Court should not consider Dr. McCaffrey's expert reports at all, on the ground that Dammeyer has not adequately authenticated them. For reasons discussed in Part C.1. below, the Court does not agree and therefore will consider Dr. McCaffrey's reports in evaluating Sea Sport's motion.

Turning to the substance of Dr. McCaffrey's reports, Sea Sport argues that Dr. McCaffrey's expert reports are insufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact because Dammeyer cannot rely on an expert opinion to establish facts to which the expert was not himself a percipient witness. As Sea Sport points out, in his expert reports, Dr. McCaffrey finds that Dammeyer's right knee injury is related to his service on the ship because while exiting the engine room on October 16, 2019, Dammeyer “twisted his right knee and banged it hard on a rung of the ladder.” ECF No. 65-3, at PageID.381. But, as Sea Sport also points out, Dammeyer did not submit any other evidence, whether from himself or any other witness, to establish that Dammeyer twisted and banged his right knee on the Vessel as Dr. McCaffrey had assumed. And Sea Sport is correct that expert reports cannot be used to assert facts on a summary judgment motion, as experts are not fact witnesses. See Hyer v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu , 654 F.Supp.3d 1111, 1120 (D. Haw. 2023) (citing Fed.R.Evid. 602 ). The upshot is that Dammeyer cannot create a genuine dispute of fact on causation by relying on Dr. McCaffrey's opinion that the twisting and banging of Dammeyer's right knee caused his injury, because Dammeyer has not adequately established a genuine dispute of fact as to whether any twisting or banging of that knee ever occurred.

But Dr. McCaffrey provided a second basis for his opinion that Dammeyer's right knee injury was causally connected to the October 16, 2019 incident: Dammeyer “developed mechanical knee pain due to asymmetric weight bearing on [his] left leg and compensatory inflammation (with increased weight bearing) on the right lower extremity.” ECF No. 65-3, at PageID.378. It is undisputed that Dammeyer's left leg was injured during his service as a seaman. Dr. McCaffrey's opinion on this point therefore provides a sufficient basis-at least for the purposes of surviving summary judgment-to causally connect Dammeyer's left leg injury with the subsequent development of his right knee pain.

Sea Sport offers one final contention. It argues, in effect, that there is a hierarchy of medical experts, and that a treating physician must always prevail over a retained expert as a matter of law. In this case, Dammeyer's treating physician, Dr. Soma, appears to have concluded that Dammeyer's right knee injury was not caused by the incident aboard the Vessel on October 16, 2019. Sea Sport contends that Dr. Soma's opinion should control as a matter of law. ECF No. 68, at PageID.488-90.

But while a treating physician's opinion is surely helpful-and, at the trial stage, may well prove dispositive as a matter of fact-the Court cannot say it invariably controls as a matter of law in these circumstances. For one thing, while a shipowner is required to unequivocally prove that maximum cure has been reached, the case law does not suggest that a treating physician's opinion is legally conclusive in every case, as opposed to being likely factually persuasive in the typical case. See Davis , 516 F.Supp.3d at 1196 (“Where conflicting medical opinions exist, a shipowner will likely not meet the unequivocal evidence standard.” (emphasis added) (citing Hedges v. Foss Mar. Co. , No. C10-5046 , 2015 WL 402809, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 29, 2015))). For another, here, the issue is not whether Dammeyer's right knee has reached maximum medical cure, as was the case in each of the precedents Sea Sport cites in support of its legal contention. The dispute in this case is, instead, whether Dammeyer was ever entitled to maintenance and cure of his right knee at all. And even if a treating physician's opinion were conclusive on the question of whether maximum medical cure has been reached, the Court is not persuaded-and Sea Sport has identified no authorities suggesting-that a treating physician's opinion should be conclusive on the question of what caused a seaman's injuries in the first place.

A well-settled principle therefore controls the issue presented here: Weighing the credibility of conflicting expert witness testimony is the province of the trier of fact. Wyler Summit P'ship v. Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. , 235 F.3d 1184, 1192 (9th Cir. 2000). Dr. McCaffrey opined that Dammeyer's right knee injury was caused in part by asymmetric weight bearing due to Dammeyer's left leg injury. If a factfinder were to credit this testimony, then Dammeyer would establish a causal connection to his service on the Vessel, given that there is no dispute that his left leg injury resulted from that service. At the summary judgment stage, it does not matter that a reasonable factfinder might not be likely to reach that conclusion. The only question is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Dammeyer, a reasonable factfinder could credit the opinion of Dammeyer's retained expert over that of his treating physician and Sea Sport's own retained expert. The Court concludes that, on this record, a reasonable factfinder could so find. See, e.g. , Cabading v. Port of Portland , 598 F.Supp.3d 1009, 1021-22 (D. Or. 2022) (declining to reject the opinions of a crew member's experts as “detached” from the case where there was a reasonable factual dispute between the parties' experts, which could not be resolved on summary judgment). For that reason, the Court denies Sea Sport's motion as to maintenance and cure of Dammeyer's right knee.

2. As for Dammeyer's left leg injury, Dammeyer concedes that it reached maximum medical cure as of February 23, 2021, and that Sea Sport paid for the related medical expenses. See ECF No. 65, at PageID.364 (Pl.'s Concise Statement of Facts ¶¶ 3-8); ECF No. 52, at PageID.209-10 (Def.'s Concise Statement of Facts ¶¶ 3-8). A vessel's obligation to furnish maintenance and cure to a seaman who is injured during service continues only until the seaman achieves maximum recovery-“that is, until the seaman is well or his condition is found to be incurable.” Permanente S.S. Corp. v. Martinez , 369 F.2d 297, 298 (9th Cir. 1966). Thus, Sea Sport's obligation to furnish maintenance and cure of Dammeyer's left leg ended when the laceration reached maximum medical cure. Dammeyer does not allege that any amount of maintenance or cure related to his left leg injury remains unpaid by Sea Sport. The Court therefore grants summary judgment to Sea Sport as to maintenance and cure of Dammeyer's left leg.

C. Sea Sport's Evidentiary Objections and Attorney's Fees and Costs

There remain two matters to address: (1) Sea Sport's evidentiary and procedural objections to some of Dammeyer's pleadings and evidence, and (2) whether attorney's fees and costs should be awarded to Sea Sport.

1. The most significant evidentiary objection concerns Dr. McCaffrey's expert reports. See ECF Nos. 65-3 & 65-4. As noted above, Sea Sport argues that Dammeyer has failed to adequately authenticate those reports, and that the Court therefore should not consider them in evaluating Sea Sport's motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 68, at PageID.485-87. Sea Sport's contention is that Dr. McCaffrey himself should have submitted a declaration, and that it was not sufficient for Dammeyer's counsel to represent that the reports were true and accurate in a declaration of his own.

Rule 56(c)(2) , as amended on December 1, 2010, provides that “[a] party may object that the material cited to support or dispute a fact cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence .” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(2) (emphasis added). The Advisory Committee notes explain that if a party does so object, “[t]he burden is on the proponent to show that the material is admissible as presented or to explain the admissible form that is anticipated. ” Id. advisory committee's note to 2010 amendment (emphasis added).

The question, therefore, is not whether Dammeyer has submitted Dr. McCaffrey's reports in a manner that is currently admissible, but rather whether he has provided enough to show that the contents of Dr. McCaffrey's reports would be admissible at trial. The Court concludes that under the circumstances of this case, Dammeyer's counsel has met his burden. Dammeyer's counsel retained Dr. McCaffrey; authorized Dr. McCaffrey to examine Dammeyer, see supra note 3; and then submitted a declaration attesting to the authenticity of the reports received from the expert he had retained. Dr. McCaffrey's reports, moreover, are addressed to Dammeyer's counsel, and contain confirmation that Dammeyer's counsel was personally aware of Dr. McCaffrey's interview and physical examination of his client. ECF No. 65-3, at PageID.376 (“Dear Mr. Moore .... As you know I interviewed your client on June 29 th , 2021, via teleconference and performed a physical examination of him in your Law Office .... In addition, I have reviewed the medical records you provided ....”). These facts are enough to support the conclusion that the submitted reports are “true and correct” copies of the reports Dr. McCaffrey prepared, as Dammeyer's counsel represented in his submitted declaration. ECF No. 65-7, at PageID.421. And Dammeyer's counsel confirmed that he intends to call Dr. McCaffrey to testify at trial-thus amply demonstrating the admissible form of evidence that is anticipated.

Sea Sport has not cited any authority to support the conclusion that the above circumstances are insufficient to put expert reports properly before the Court at the summary judgment stage. The case law, instead, suggests that where “no substantive doubt has been raised” that a proffered document is authentic, “and the circumstantial evidence” suggests the document is “in fact authentic,” the Court may consider the document to be sufficiently “authenticated” for summary judgment purposes. Shuffle Master, Inc. v. MP Games LLP , 553 F.Supp.2d 1202, 1209-10 (D. Nev. 2008). Here, Sea Sport has not raised any “substantive doubt” as to the authenticity of Dr. McCaffrey's reports, “and the circumstantial evidence” suggests that the reports are “in fact authentic.” Id. The Court therefore overrules Sea Sport's objection to considering Dr. McCaffrey's reports at the summary judgment stage.

As to the other items Sea Sport challenges-a claims adjuster letter, ECF No. 65-1, medical records, ECF Nos. 65-2 & 65-5, various amended and supplemented filings that Dammeyer made without seeking leave, ECF Nos. 66, 74-75, and Coast Guard reports and photographs attached to Dammeyer's summary judgment motion, ECF Nos. 54-3 to 54-6-the Court need not make rulings because none of these filings or exhibits are material to the Court's rulings on the summary judgment motions.

That said, the Court agrees with Sea Sport that Dammeyer was required to seek leave before filing his amended and supplemented submissions. See LR7.2 (“No further or supplemental briefing shall be submitted without leave of court.”); LR56.1(h) (“Supplemental affidavits and declarations may only be submitted with leave of court.”). As indicated at the hearing, the Court admonishes counsel for Dammeyer for filing his amended and supplemented concise statement of facts in support of his motion, ECF No. 63, without leave of court in violation of the Local Rules, and reminds the parties that it expects the Local Rules to be followed at all times. The Court declines, however, to go so far as to deny Dammeyer's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that it is procedurally defective, as Sea Sport requests. As for Dammeyer's other amended submissions-his amended reply memorandum and amended further concise statement of facts in support of his reply, ECF Nos. 74 & 75-at the hearing, counsel for Dammeyer explained that he had reached out to courthouse staff before filing those materials and was instructed to do so. Given this proffered explanation, the Court concludes Dammeyer did not violate the Local Rules with respect to those amended filings.

2. The final matter to resolve is that of attorney's fees and costs. Sea Sport initially requested reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in both (1) responding to Dammeyer's amended and supplemental materials filed without leave of Court, ECF No. 66, at PageID.449-50, and (2) preparing its motion for summary judgment as to maximum medical cure of Dammeyer's left leg because Dammeyer failed to sign the stipulation on that undisputed issue, ECF No. 68, at PageID.483-84 n.1, 491-92.

At the hearing on the summary judgment motions, Sea Sport withdrew its request for attorney's fees and costs related to Dammeyer's motion and unauthorized filings. ECF No. 78. The Court appreciates Sea Sport's reasonable concession on this point and, accordingly, does not sanction Dammeyer's counsel for his violation of Local Rules 7.2 and 56.1(h).

With that concession, the Court only considers attorney's fees and costs as related to Sea Sport's motion. Dammeyer does appear to have violated the Local Rules by not properly handling the pre-filing conference, required by Local Rule 7.8, on Sea Sport's motion for partial summary judgment. See LR7.8 (requiring counsel to meet and confer before filing a motion and to discuss “the substance of the contemplated motion and any potential partial or complete resolution”); see also LR1.3 (directing that the Local Rules be employed by the parties “to promote the just, efficient, and economical determination of every action and proceeding”).

According to Sea Sport, at the parties' pre-filing conference under Local Rule 7.8, Dammeyer's counsel agreed that Dammeyer's left leg injury had reached maximum medical cure as of February 23, 2021 (meaning that no further maintenance and cure was needed), and Sea Sport therefore circulated a stipulation to that effect. ECF No. 51, at PageID.186 n.1. But Dammeyer's counsel did not sign the stipulation. Id . As a result, Sea Sport filed a motion for partial summary judgment on, among other things, this issue. Then, in his opposition, Dammeyer conceded the fact on which he had earlier agreed (but then failed) to stipulate-that his left leg has already reached maximum medical cure. See ECF Nos. 64 & 66.

This violation of the Local Rules supports an award of attorney's fees and costs, but it is not sufficient standing alone. “Generally, attorneys' fees are not available in admiralty absent bad faith.” Louis v. Atlantis Submarines, Inc. , No. 97-cv-01194, 1999 WL 641793, at *3 (D. Haw. Feb. 8, 1999) (citing Burroughs v. Bd. of Trs., 542 F.2d 1128, 1131-32 (9th Cir. 1976)); see also Southworth Mach. Co. v. F/V Corey Pride , 994 F.2d 37, 41 (1st Cir. 1993) (explaining that under “federal maritime law,” “the parties pay their own fees absent bad faith or oppressive litigation tactics”). At the hearing on the motions, Dammeyer explained that he understood the parties to be still negotiating the details of the stipulation when Sea Sport filed its motion. In light of this proffered explanation, and given that there has been no prior finding of a violation of the Local Rules against Dammeyer's counsel, the Court does not find that Dammeyer's counsel acted in bad faith. And, for that reason, the Court declines to make the requested award of attorney's fees and costs.

Plaintiff Kevin B. Dammeyer's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. Defendant Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Finally, Sea Sport Cruises, Inc.'s request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Edit Citation

• Distinguished
• Referencing
• Uncategorized

Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Citation.

Get 2 points on providing a valid reason for the above change.

Add Equivalent Citation

Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment.

Select Preference

Share the Judgment

Are you sure?

By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us. Leave your message here.

Click here to remove this judgment from your profile.

Moscow - Russian Rivers and Waterways Port of Call

Moscow is a wonderful city to visit, and travelers on river ship cruise tours to or from St. Petersburg spend a few days in Moscow . This capital city of Russia was our last port on a river cruise tour, and we had about four days to see most of the highlights. Our first day we did an overview driving tour and rode the subway under the Mockba (Moscow) River to Red Square. The next day we toured the State Armory and the Kremlin.

These photos show some of the other highlights you can see with three or four days in Moscow .

The Northern River Terminal is located on the Moscow Canal in the northwest section of Moscow at the Khimki Reservoir.

Most river cruise ships sailing between Moscow and St. Petersburg use the ship as a hotel while in Moscow. Because of traffic, it's often a long drive into the city, but the sights along the way are interesting, and you only have to unpack once for the river cruise.

View of Downtown Moscow from Sparrow Hills

Sparrow Hills is the best place to get a great panoramic view of Moscow. The Sparrow Hills overlook the Mockba River and are near Moscow State University.

Novodevichy Convent in Moscow

Novodevichy Convent in Moscow was founded in 1524, and was once used as a sort of prison for the unwanted wives and sisters of the Tsars. Peter the Great sent both his first wife and his sister to Novodevichy. Since the convent had such famous nuns, it was very wealthy due to the many donations of the Tsars and their families. At one time in the 1700s, the cloister had over 36,000 serfs working in 36 villages. Novodevichy was ravaged by the French armies in 1812, but the brave nuns saved the buildings by disarming the fuses set to blow them up. The Soviets wanted to make the convent into a museum in the early 1920s, but it was again saved.

Novodevichy also has a cemetery with the graves of many famous Russians, including Nikita Khrushchev, Anton Chekhov, Raisa Gorbachev, and Yuri Nikulin.

View of the Mockba River in Moscow, Russia

The Mockba (Moscow) River runs into the Volga via the 79.5 mile long Moscow Canal.

River ships sailing between Moscow and St. Petersburg on the Baltic Waterways embark and disembark at the Northern River Terminal about an hour's drive from the city. The drive time can vary significantly in length because of the heavy Moscow traffic. The river looks peaceful here, as it winds around the cosmopolitan area of Moscow.

Cathedral of Christ the Redeemer (Cathedral of Christ the Savior) in Moscow

The Cathedral of Christ the Redeemer, also known as the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, is the largest church in Russia, holding 10,000 worshipers.

The original Cathedral of Christ the Savior was built over 44 years to celebrate the 1812 victory over Napoleon. It was completed in 1883. Stalin had the church destroyed in 1931, but it was rebuilt using mostly private funds in 1999. The new church is a replica of the original. Note that it took 44 years the first time and only 4 years the second to complete the church! Isn't modern technology impressive.

One interesting tidbit is that it took three attempts to blow up the church in 1931. Stalin planned to build a huge Palace of the Soviets on the cleared land, but engineers determined that the land was too boggy. In the 60 years intervening, the space was used for a variety of things, including a year-round swimming pool!

Vendors' Market and Ski Jump at Sparrow Hills in Moscow

The panoramic view of Moscow from Sparrow Hills is a stopover for most tour groups, so we were not surprised to see a large number of vendors. The ski jump was a surprise, but Moscow gets very cold in winter, so winter sports are very popular. This ski jump is near Moscow State University and has a great view of the city. Seeing this ski jump reminded me of the famous Holmenkollen Ski Jump in Oslo, which also has a great view of that northern capital city.

Russian Soldiers' Memorial in Victory Park in Moscow

Matryoshka dolls for sale in moscow.

I thought this display of dolls was beautiful! The Matryoshka nesting dolls range in price from just a few dollars to thousands of dollars.

Central Museum of Armed Forces in Moscow, Russia

This small band greeted us at the Central Museum of Armed Forces in Moscow. They played a variety of band music and made us all feel very welcome.

Grand Triumphal Arch Celebrates the Victory Over Napoleon in the War of 1812

This arch looks a little like the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, and it is located near the Victory Park Metro Station in Moscow.

This Grand Triumphal Arch is decorated with the coats of arms from the 48 Russian provinces. To celebrate the victory over France in the war of 1812, it also includes bas-reliefs of the "Expulsion of the French." The arch was originally built in 1834, but has only been on this site since 1968.

It is a little ironic that this arch resembles the Paris Arc de Triomphe , which Napoleon built between 1806 and 1836 to celebrate his French victories.

Moscow Metro Station at the Ploshchad Revolyutsii (Revolution Square)

This station near Red Square has many statues honoring the workers of Russia.

Moscow Metro Station near Victory Park

The Metro in Moscow is one of its shining industrial achievements. Construction on the Metro was begun in 1931 and continues today. The system has over 165 stations and 155 miles of track. Over 9300 trains, traveling sometimes as fast as 56 mph, navigate the huge system each day. Almost 10 million people ride the Moscow Metro every day, which is more than the New York and London systems combined. We found the Metro to be very efficient, with trains arriving every few minutes.

Navigating the Metro system can be somewhat of a problem for non-Russian speaking riders. Most of the signage is in Cyrillic only, and the stations are quite large. Trying to find the correct exit while walking long distances underground can be challenging.

On our cruise tour, we rode the Metro as a group with our program director from near Victory Park under the Mockba River to Red Square. Several of the group ventured out on their own during our time in Moscow, and many rode the Metro. They all returned with stories of getting lost underground, but none seemed the worse for the experience, and they all loved telling the tales.

Red Square in Moscow

Red Square in Moscow is a must-see for visitors to the capital city of Russia.

The Kremlin in Moscow, Russia

The Kremlin is a favorite of Moscow tourists. Inside these walls are buildings for the government of Russia, cathedrals, and the wonderful State Armory museum.

Taras Bulba Restaurant in Moscow

We enjoyed a traditional Ukrainian lunch at this cute restaurant in Moscow before checking in at our hotel.

Buses Wait for Passengers Outside Museum

River cruise tour groups are usually divided into groups for the duration of the tour. Each group had their own bus when touring.

Military Airplanes at the Central Museum of Armed Forces in Moscow, Russia

Although much of the military museum was indoors, there was quite a collection of planes, helicopters, missile launchers, and tanks outside.

Foreign Ministry Building, One of Moscow's Seven Stalinist-Gothic Skyscrapers

Seven skyscrapers with layers giving them a "wedding cake" appearance dot the Moscow skyline. The style is considered Stalinist-Gothic.

Russian and American War Veterans at the Central Museum of Armed Forces

Meeting with some World War II Russian War veterans was a highlight of our day at the Central Museum of Armed Forces in Moscow.

Rocket Launchers and Missiles at the Central Museum of Armed Forces in Moscow

The inside of this museum is particularly impressive, but you will need a guide since all of the signage is only in Russian.

Old Arbat Pedestrian Shopping Area in Moscow

We all enjoyed exploring the shops on this mile-long pedestrian shopping area.

Food prices were high in the tourist attraction, with two small pizzas, two small beers, and a bottle of water at an outdoor cafe costing $40. Many of our group ate at the large McDonalds, where prices were more reasonable.

Female Cosmonaut Model at Star City Cosmonaut Training Center near Moscow

Female cosmonauts play an important role in the Russian space program. In 1963, Valentina Tereshkova from Yaroslavl was the first woman in space.

Souvenir Shop in Old Arbat Shopping Area in Moscow

The area of Old Arbat had many English signs to attract the tourist trade.

Centrifuge at Star City Outside Moscow, Russia

This 18 meter centrifuge is the world's largest. The centrifuge weighs over 30000 tons, and the maximum load is 30 G, but most tests are run at 3 or 4 G.

A centrifuge ride is the first test for a cosmonaut, whose entire training school takes from five to eight years. The centrifuge can simulate the extreme force of gravity that cosmonauts (and astronauts) face when going into space. A centrifuge training session lasts about 30 minutes, and the trainee experiences both the centrifugal force as well as the spin of the pod he/she is riding in. Just typing this makes me a little queasy!

Cosmonaut's Bathroom Facilities on First Space Flights at Star City

Just like in the USA, everyone who visits the Star City cosmonaut training center near Moscow wants to know how cosmonauts "go to the bathroom". They have more sophisticated equipment today, but this contraption from the early space flights is fairly self explanatory.

Star City Tank Used for Cosmonaut Weightlessness Training near Moscow

This 12-meter deep pool is used to simulate weightlessness training. The pool is flooded and the cosmonauts perform repair tasks on the model of the International Space Station. SCUBA diving underwater is very similar to the weightless experience the cosmonauts experience when working in outer space.

Mir Space Station Replica at Star City near Moscow

The original Mir disintegrated when it fell to earth in 2001. Mir, which means peace in Russian, was launched in 1986.

Marvel Paull with Statue of Yuri Gagarin at Star City near Moscow

Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space, and the Star City Cosmonaut training center was named after him in 1968.

River Cruise Passengers with Yuri Onufrienko, Russian Cosmonaut at Star City

In case you can't tell, Yuri is the one in the middle. My famous traveling mother, Marvel Paull, is on the left and Dick, a cruise friend is on the right.

A highlight of our day in Star City was a visit with Yuri Onufrienko , a Russian cosmonaut who spent extended time in space at the Mir space station in 1996 and the International Space Station in 2001-2002. Yuri patiently took many questions from our small inquisitive group.

Cosmonaut Space Suit at Star City near Moscow

Cosmonauts sit in this position on take off. Thanks to Jerry G. for the tip about the sign. It says, "Don't touch!"

Stained Glass Window at Star City near Moscow

Program directors at farewell dinner in moscow.

After 16 days of discovery, learning, and fun, we had a farewell dinner with the six Program Directors - Evgeny, Olga, Vladimir, Svetlana, Violetta, and Marina - in Moscow.

The Kremlin is a triangular, walled citadel in the center of Moscow. The Kremlin is considered by most to be the heart of the city. First conceived in the 12th century, the Kremlin (which means fortress) was expanded by Tsar Ivan III (Ivan the Great) during the 15th century. His architects designed the magnificent Cathedral of the Assumption and the Faceted Palace, and the Kremlin was an interesting mix of both Russian and Renaissance styles. During the Soviet time of the 1930s, many of the Kremlin buildings were destroyed or vandalized, and the complex remained closed to the public until 1955.

Today the Kremlin is home to the Russian President and his administration. Many buildings are open to the public, but you may need to be with a guide (check in advance).

I visited the Kremlin when in Moscow on a Russian Waterways cruise tour from St. Petersburg.

The Kremlin was also one of the 21 finalists for the New Seven Wonders of the World.  

Red Square in Moscow, Russia

Red Square's name has nothing to do with Communism or Soviet Russia. The old Russian word for "beautiful" and "red" was the same; the square was supposed to be called "Beautiful Square". Red Square has been the center of Moscow activity since the 16th century when the Tsar cleared the area and allowed vendors, shoppers, and businesses to fill the square. Today this square is surrounded by the Moscow Kremlin, the State Historical Museum, GUM Shopping Mall , and St. Basil's Cathedral .

Many of the important events of the last three hundred years in Russia have been marked by parades or demonstrations in Red Square. Anyone who enters Red Square will have memories from TV or movie reels of this magnificent public square. Those of us who grew up during the Cold War era can remember the parades of soldiers, tanks, and other armaments past Lenin's Tomb just outside the Kremlin Wall. The World War II generation remembers Red Square as the site of a huge victory celebration at the end of the war.

25 Best Things to Do in Moscow

St. Petersburg, Russia

A Guide to Moscow: Capital of Russia, City of Domes

9 Things to See in Moscow's Red Square

Moscow in September: Weather, What to Pack, and What to See

10 Must-Visit Palaces and Castles in Russia

St. Basil’s Cathedral in Moscow: Planning Your Visit

Photos of Russia

Soviet Sights in Moscow – Moscow USSR Sites

Moscow Attractions for Children

The Top 12 Things to Do in Astrakhan

Moscow Metro: The Complete Guide

The Top 12 Things to Do in Novgorod, Russia

Regensburg: Planning Your Trip

The Top 15 Places to Visit in Russia

The Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg

Sign up to our newsletter

By signing up to our newsletter you consent to IMG Media Limited using your contact details to keep you informed by email about its or other similar Sport 24 related events’ products, services and content. You may withdraw your consent at any time.

* Mandatory fields

• American Football
• Horse racing
• AFC ASIAN QUALIFIERS
• AFC CHAMPIONS LEAGUE
• AFC WOMEN'S ASIAN CUP
• AMERICA'S CUP
• ATP 1000 TENNIS
• ATP TENNIS FINALS
• AUGUSTA MASTERS
• AUSTRALIAN OPEN
• BELMONT STAKES
• BIG BASH LEAGUE
• BREEDERS' CUP 2023
• COPA LIBERTADORES
• DP WORLD TOUR
• DUBAI WORLD CUP
• EUROLEAGUE BASKETBALL
• GRAND NATIONAL
• HSBC WORLD RUGBY SEVENS
• INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL
• KENTUCKY DERBY
• MELBOURNE CUP

NATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE

Nba playoffs.

• NFL SUPER BOWL
• PEGASUS WORLD CUP 2024
• PGA CHAMPIONSHIP

PREAKNESS STAKES

Premier league.

• PRIX DE L’ARC DE TRIOMPHE
• ROLAND-GARROS
• SKI JUMPING
• STANLEY CUP FINAL

STANLEY CUP PLAYOFFS

• STATE OF ORIGIN
• UEFA CHAMPIONS LEAGUE
• UEFA CONFERENCE LEAGUE
• UEFA EUROPA LEAGUE
• UEFA EUROPEAN QUALIFIERS
• UEFA NATIONS LEAGUE
• UEFA SUPER CUP
• US OPEN TENNIS
• WOMEN'S OPEN GOLF

Here is a list of upcoming programmes based on your filtered selection.

Sharks v Roosters

• Google Calendar

Italy GP Qualifying

Port Adelaide v Hawthorn

Italy grand prix.

Cruise Routes (Interactive Map)

Request a quote download brochure

Russian River Cruises

• Find your cruise
• Moscow — St. Petersburg
• Moscow — Astrakhan
• Astrakhan — St. Petersburg
• St. Petersburg
• Cruise Highlights
• News & Travel Tips

Lorem Ipsum

Moscow to Astrakhan

14 days – 13 nights

Collapse Full Itinerary

Airport transfer / Check-in

Volga dream experience:

City Tour / Moscow Metro/ Tretyakov Gallery

Meals: Breakfast, lunch

Moscow Kremlin / Armory Museum 

Volga dream experience: Bread, Salt & Vodka Welcome Aboard Ceremony

Meals: Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner

Town of Uglich / Church of St. Dmitri-on-the-Blood

Volga dream experience: Russian Cooking Class

Yaroslavl City Tour / Governor’s house 

Volga dream experience: Costumed Russian Tea Ceremony

Relaxing day of leisure / Onboard activities

Volga dream experience: An onboard presentation

City tour / XVIth-century Kremlin / Folk concert by a local children’s group

Volga dream experience: Russian Dinner with Vodka Tasting

City tour /  Kazan Kremlin / Concert of traditional Tatar music

Volga dream experience: Piano Concert – pieces by Tchaikovsky and Rakhmaninov

City tour / Space Museum /  Samara State Art Museum

Volga dream experience: Sun Deck Barbeque

City tour /  Radishev State Art Museum

Volga dream experience: -

Mamayev Hill / Battle of Stalingrad Panorama Museum

Concert in a local Conservatory

Volga dream experience: Concert in a local Conservatory

Tour to a fortress of Astrakhan

Volga dream experience: Farewell dinner

Check-out / Airport transfer

Meals: Breakfast

The rates are set for a cruising season. The price is not dependent on the month within a selected year

Choose a date

View all months

Choose Staterooms

All prices are per person based on double occupancy.

All rates are per person, based on double occupancy. Actual size of cabins can slightly differ within one category.

Request a quote

Journey: Volga Dream

Price per person: not specified

Watch CBS News

Royal Caribbean, Carnival will cruise out of Baltimore for first time since Key Bridge collapse. Here's when.

By Adam Thompson

Updated on: May 17, 2024 / 7:56 PM EDT / CBS Baltimore

BALTIMORE - Royal Caribbean and Carnival are getting ready to set sail out of the Port of Baltimore as the first cruise departures from the port since the March 26 Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse.

The Port of Baltimore announced that the Vision of the Seas, owned by Royal Caribbean, will embark on a five-night voyage on May 25 from Baltimore to Bermuda.

The Carnival Legend will depart out of Baltimore on May 26.

"Baltimore is back," the Port of Baltimore posted on social media.

"We are extremely grateful to the officials and incredible first responders in Baltimore, who've shown great leadership and resolve in this difficult time, as well as our supportive partners in Norfolk, whose rapid response allowed us to continue to deliver our scheduled sailings for our guests," said Christine Duffy, president of Carnival Cruise Line. "It's been our goal to resume operations in Baltimore as soon as possible, and after working closely with local, state and federal agencies, we look forward to a successful return."

Get ready…Port of Baltimore is ready to cruise once again! @RoyalCaribbean 's Vision of the Seas will depart on May 25 for a 5-night trip from Baltimore to Bermuda! This marks the 1st cruise leaving Baltimore since the bridge incident. Baltimore is back! https://t.co/XEguEqqTOR pic.twitter.com/v7dLcDpLmA — Port of Baltimore (@portofbalt) May 15, 2024

The cargo ship Dali crashed into Baltimore's bridge in late March, killing six construction workers, halting access to and from the Port of Baltimore and knocking down the entire bridge.

The Port of Baltimore services cruise ships from Royal Caribbean, Carnival and Norwegian.

A Carnival spokesperson told CBS News the company expects a less than $10 million impact on both adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization as well as its adjusted net income for the full year 2024.   

In April, a Carnival cruise ship was expected to return to Baltimore, but after the Key Bridge collapse, it ported in Norfolk, Virginia.

Regina Ali, a spokesperson for AAA, was on that Carnival ship when the cargo ship caused the bridge collapse.

"I'm looking and I'm like, 'Wait a minute, this is in Maryland and it was so surreal,'" Ali said. 

Since then, cruise ships originally slated for Baltimore took off and  returned in Norfolk.

Adam Thompson is a Digital Content Producer for CBS Baltimore.

Featured Local Savings

More from cbs news.

Dramatic video shows why Dali's removal from Key Bridge collapse site has been pushed back

Dali's four power failures remain focus of Key Bridge collapse investigation as NTSB chair testifies at congressional hearing

Maryland poised to sue over Key Bridge collapse, contracts five law firms

NTSB Chair breaks down Dali malfunctions, lawmakers concerned about rebuild funding