Lawsuit Regarding Maryland’s White Marlin Open Moved to Federal Court

First Place in this years edition of the largest and richest billfish fishing tournament — Ocean City, Maryland’s 2016 White Marlin Open — is in doubt. Last month, officials from the 2016 White Marlin Open declared a rules violation that could possibly disqualify the winner in the white marlin category. Angler Phillip Heasley had caught a 76.5-pound white marlin and officials have now questioned the timing of the catch after a polygraph test for the winners. After the rules violation declaration, the White Marlin Open filed a Complaint for Interpleader in Worcester County Circuit Court of Maryland.  In doing so, the Open asked the Court to decide (1) if there were rules violations committed by Mr. Heasley, and (2) how best should the $2.8 million in prize money be distributed.

According to the White Marlin Open rules, contestant boats cannot put fishing lines in the water prior to 8:30 AM. In its lawsuit, the White Marlin Open asserts that the time of Mr. Heasley’s winning catch was changed on the catch report submitted by Mr. Heasley and his crew. The official catch report appears to show an initial time of 8:15 AM, but then it appears to be altered to 9:05 AM. There are also questions, based on the polygraph test, as to (1) whether Mr. Heasley had assistance in “reeling in the fish” — which is not permitted, and (2) whether Mr. Heasley’s boat passed “the sea buoy before 4 a.m.” — which is not permitted.

The case — originally filed in the Worcester County Circuit Court of Maryland — has been moved to U.S. District Court. At the request of Mr. Heasley’s attorneys, the White Marlin Open’s Complaint for Interpleader was successfully removed from Worcester County Circuit Court. The primary reason for removing the case to federal court was based on jurisdictional issues because White Marlin Open is a corporation based in Maryland while Heasley is a Florida resident.

According to the Court, “although listed a defendants, the interest of the other prize winners in the 2016 White Marlin Open is aligned with the plaintiff as they will each receive a portion of defendant Heasley’s winnings under the plaintiff’s allegation. . . The Fourth Circuit follows the well-recognized doctrine that parties will be considered plaintiffs or defendants based on their interest in the litigation, not their designation in the caption of the complaint. As the other defendants all stand to receive a portion of the first-place prize that the White Marlin Open seeks to interplead, they are properly considered plaintiffs here.”

The Court further clarified that “by the very nature of an interpleader action under Maryland rule, the plaintiff is likely to be dismissed from the action it filed against the defendants and one or more of the current defendants will be designated plaintiffs.”

Ultimately, now, a Maryland federal judge will now decide if there were violations by the questioned winners and, if so, how the White Marlin Open prize money will be distributed.

Longman & Van Grack’s litigation and outdoor recreation attorneys regularly assists a variety of company and individual clients with many types of legal issues within the firm’s Litigation and Sports and Recreation Law practices. In fact, Longman & Van Grack attorney Adam Van Grack has represented many clients in various litigation matters in state and federal court. Call our litigation lawyers at (301) 291-5027 and meet with one of our attorneys at one of our Rockville, MD; Bethesda, MD; Washington, DC; or Northern Virginia Offices. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in Maryland, Virginia, Washington, DC, New York, Wyoming, California, and Massachusetts.