MARITIME LAW
United States District Court, District of Alaska (2022)
Sarah Brooks
In In re Cargo of the SS Islander, 22 WL 2757372 (D. Alaska 2022), the court held that a third
party may intervene in civil cases to access documents when there is a nexus between the case in
which the third party seeks to intervene and a case in which the third party itself is involved, so
long as doing so will not prejudice or delay the case subject to the intervention. (Id. at *2). In this
case, Pacific Survey Group (PSG) sought to intervene in a case, recently reopened in this court,
between Tyche High Seas Capital Corp, a company with salvage rights to the cargo of the SS
Islander, and Royal Sun Alliance (RSA), the owner of the gold shipment onboard the Islander. (Id.
at *1). PSG sought to intervene in this matter to gain access to a sealed status report filed by Tyche
in its action against RSA, and to then use that report as part of PSG’s separate litigation against
Tyche over payment of monies pending in Washington. (Id. at *1–2). The court permitted PSG’s
intervention in the case between Tyche and RSA because there existed a nexus between that action
and the Washington case between PSG and Tyche. (Id. at *2–3). The court found a nexus between
the two cases because both cases dealt with the cargo of the Islander. (Id. at *3). Additionally,
PSG’s intervention did not prejudice or delay the proceedings between Tyche and RSA. (Id.). The
intervention did not prejudice either of the parties, because, although Tyche claimed that its
competitor PSG might use the reports to create its own salvage plans, the court could prevent that
through a protective order. (Id.). Likewise, PSG’s intervention did not cause any delay because
nothing would happen in the case between Tyche and RSA other than the filing of yearly status
reports until and if any Islander cargo is found. (Id.). Granting PSG’s motion for permissive
intervention, the district court held that a third party may intervene in civil cases to access
documents when there is a nexus between the case in which the third party seeks to intervene and
a case in which the third party itself is involved, so long as doing so will not prejudice or delay the
case subject to the intervention. (Id. at *2, 4).
