Finney v. Howey

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
BRANNON FINNEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
BRYAN R. HOWEY, and his marital
community,
Defendant.
Case No. 3:20-cv-00289-SLG-KFR
ORDER RE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Before the Court at Docket 33 is Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration of
the Court’s Order re Report and Recommendation at Docket 31. 	Defendant
asserts that the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction always rests with
the plaintiff. Regardless of who bears that burden, the Court has found that it has
subject matter jurisdiction in admiralty over this contract dispute regarding the
temporary transfer of a Limited Entry Permit for commercial fishing, as “the nature
of the transaction was maritime.”1 Therefore, the motion to reconsider is DENIED.
DATED this 29 th day of December, 2022, at Anchorage, Alaska.
/s/ Sharon L. Gleason
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Kirby, 543 U.S. 14, 24 (2004) (quoting Exxon Corp. v. Central
Gulf Lines, Inc., 500 U.S. 603, 611 (1991)).
Case 3:20-cv-00289-SLG-KFR Document 34 Filed 12/29/22 Page 1 of 1