IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
KURT SWEDELIUS, LISA SWEDELIUS,
AND JANET HOWARD, on behalf of her
minor grandchildren, Katherine, Heidi, and Kjel Swedelius, Plaintiff,
vs.
STATE OF ALASKA, FRANK D. BEACH, JR., SHARON BEACH,
BEACH ENTERPRISES, INC., BEACH FISHING, INC., Defendants.
Case No. 3DI-98-2 CI
PRELIMINARY DECISION ON
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Kurt Swedelius was severely injured while crewing aboard the F/V Skoal in Ugashik Bay during the
Fishing, Inc. [BFI], a Washington corporation, and chartered by Beach Enterprises, Inc. [BEI],
s the Master of the boat. Both he and his wife, Sharon Beach, were principals in the two
or employed in the operation.
Plaintiff signed an employment agreement that was offered as Exhibit C, but the document was not
owner disclosed in the document. Frank Beach avers that he told Swedelius that BEI was his
didn t know who owned the boat; he thought Frank Beach was both owner and master.
The injury apparently occurred when the Skoal was test fishing for the State, so Swedelius sued the
nk Beach was sued as both the agent of the marital community and as owner and master of the Skoal,
nd BFI.
SNIPPETS:
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
KURT SWEDELIUS, LISA SWEDELIUS, AND JANET HOWARD, on behalf of her minor grandchildren,
STATE OF ALASKA, FRANK D. BEACH, JR., SHARON BEACH, BEACH ENTERPRISES, INC., BEACH FISHING,
The boat was owned by Defendant Beach Fishing, Inc., a Washington corporation, and chartered
was the Master of the boat.
Both he and his wife, Sharon Beach, were principals in the two corporations, but Ms.
Plaintiff signed an employment agreement that was offered as Exhibit C, but the document was
Frank Beach avers that he told Swedelius that BEI was his employer, but Plaintiff testified
The injury apparently occurred when the Skoal was test fishing for the State, so Swedelius
Frank Beach was sued as both the agent of the marital community and as owner and master of
Howard has filed an opposition to the motion for summary judgment.
Claims under the Jones Act and under general maritime law -- maintenance and cure, and
In the case cited by the children, Alaska Valuation Service sued a man for whom it did some
The court held the issue of disclosure to be one of fact and upheld the judgment for AVS,
"not enough evidence exists at this time to determine whether the corporations have
While inferences of fact from proffered proofs are drawn in favor of the party opposing
It was also noted that the Beach Defendants had withdrawn their request for oral argument on
|
