Tennessee Boat Owner Faces Federal Marine Insurance Lawsuit in Florida After Custom Sailboat Goes Adrift Near Marathon City Marina
Cari Chlarson, a resident of Tennessee, has been named as a defendant in a maritime declaratory judgment lawsuit filed in the Southern District of Florida by a group of marine underwriters. The legal action, filed under Case No. 0:26-cv-61813-WPD, seeks a federal court ruling to declare a marine insurance policy null and void from its inception following an incident where Chlarson’s fifty-six-foot custom ketch sailboat, Eagle II, broke free from its anchor and was set adrift near Marathon, Florida.
Marine Insurers File Declaratory Judgment Action in Florida Federal Court to Deny Hull Coverage for Custom Ketch Sailboat
According to the federal court complaint, the underlying dispute stems from a maritime casualty that took place on or about January 17, 2026. Chlarson’s vessel, a 1974 custom ketch sailboat powered by a 135-horsepower diesel engine, was anchored near the Marathon City Marina when it was set adrift. Chlarson reported the marine insurance loss to her underwriters on January 29, 2026, seeking recovery under a policy that provided hull coverage limits of one hundred and twenty thousand dollars. Following a comprehensive claim investigation into the circumstances of the incident, the insurance consortium filed a lawsuit asserting that the boat owner breached critical policy conditions and fundamental maritime warranties, thereby relieving the insurers of any obligation to pay for the vessel damage or loss.
Underwriters Cite Maritime Law Doctrine of Uberrimae Fidei to Void Marine Policy Over Concealed Criminal Record of Boat Operator
The core of the maritime legal dispute centers on allegations that Chlarson violated the centuries-old maritime law doctrine of uberrimae fidei, which mandates the duty of utmost good faith between an insured party and an underwriter. Under this strictly enforced maritime rule, a boat owner is required to fully and voluntarily disclose all facts material to the calculation of the insurance risk, even if those facts are not explicitly requested on the application forms. The lawsuit alleges that during the application process in October 2025, Chlarson failed to disclose the criminal history of the vessel’s named operator, Steven McDaniels. Subsequent investigation by the insurers revealed that McDaniels had been convicted of second-degree driving while impaired and driving without a valid license in Minnesota, and was active on an outstanding arrest warrant for probation violations at the time the policy was issued.
Custom Sailboat Purchase Price Discrepancy Leads to Allegations of Policy Misrepresentation and Material Concealment
In addition to the concealed background of the vessel operator, the marine underwriters assert that Chlarson made further material misrepresentations regarding the financial valuation of the watercraft. On the official marine insurance application, Chlarson stated that the purchase price of the custom sailboat was one hundred and twenty thousand dollars. However, the federal complaint alleges that the post-loss investigation uncovered evidence that the actual purchase price paid by Chlarson was significantly less than the stated amount. The insurers note that Chlarson subsequently refused to produce a bill of sale to verify the financial transaction, constituting a direct violation of the policy provisions that render the contract null and void in the event of non-disclosure or misrepresentation of material facts.
Consortium of Marine Insurers Seeks Total Rescission of Policy to Exclude All Financial Liabilities and Claims
The federal maritime lawsuit consists of four separate counts seeking total policy rescission based on both general contract terms and traditional maritime law principles. The plaintiffs—which include Accelerant Specialty Insurance Company, Hadron Specialty Insurance Company, Spinnaker Specialty Insurance Company, Texas Insurance Company, Palomar Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance Company, and certain underwriting syndicates at Lloyd’s of London—argue that they would have never issued the policy, or would have required drastically different premium rates, had the true background of the operator and the real purchase price of the vessel been disclosed. Because these facts are highly material to the underwriting risk of a luxury ketch sailboat in Florida waters, the insurers have asked the court to declare the policy void from its inception, which would entirely eliminate coverage for the anchor-failure incident.
Contact an Experienced Maritime Claims Attorney Today to Protect Your Rights After a Serious Boating Accident or Insurance Dispute
Navigating marine insurance claims or defending against a policy rescission lawsuit in federal court requires an in-depth understanding of complex admiralty law principles and insurance warranties. Underwriters frequently utilize strict maritime doctrines like utmost good faith to deny high-value hull claims after a vessel goes adrift or sustains catastrophic damage. If you own a boat or yacht and are facing an insurance coverage denial, an investigation, or a federal lawsuit from your underwriters, consulting a dedicated maritime attorney can help preserve your legal rights and secure the compensation you deserve.
Contact us now to speak with a maritime attorney.
Disclaimer: Our firm does not represent the plaintiff in this case and is not involved in the litigation. The information provided is a summary of allegations based on publicly available court filings. We make no representations about the truth of these allegations, are not commenting on the merits of the case, and are not predicting any outcome.
