A U. S. federal judge has dismissed most of the remaining civil claims against the owner and operator of the container ship Dali, which allided with the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore in March 2024. The decision, issued by Judge James K. Bredar of the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland on August 25, significantly narrows the scope of legal actions stemming from the incident.
The Dali, primarily crewed by Indians, struck the bridge on March 26, 2024, resulting in the deaths of six construction workers and the temporary closure of Baltimore's bustling port. Traffic resumed fully only after three months. In May 2026, Grace Ocean Private Limited and Synergy Marine Pte Ltd, the ship's owner and manager, settled wrongful death, personal injury, and most cargo claims privately. That same month, they reached a $2.5 billion settlement with the State of Maryland. This followed a previous $102 million settlement in October 2024 with the U. S. Department of Justice over federal claims.
Judge Bredar's ruling leaned heavily on the Robins Dry Dock rule, a longstanding maritime law doctrine. This precedent prevents parties from recovering purely economic losses in maritime negligence cases unless those losses stem from physical damage to property in which they have an ownership interest. The rule aims to curb excessive claims from businesses indirectly affected by such incidents.
As a result, most claims before the court were dismissed. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore can continue only with their claim regarding damage to a 72-inch water main beneath the bridge. Other claims, including those for increased road maintenance and lost tax revenue due to diverted traffic, were dismissed. The court also invalidated a city ordinance passed in August 2024, which had sought to allow recovery of such losses, ruling it exceeded Baltimore's legislative authority under the Maryland Constitution's home-rule provisions.
Baltimore County may pursue claims for damage to waterways and shorelines it can prove ownership of. However, its claims for emergency response costs, search-and-rescue expenses, and public nuisance were dismissed. Claims from businesses citing economic losses due to the bridge's destruction were largely rejected. Only four claimants, who alleged physical damage to cargo aboard the Dali, were permitted to proceed with their claims.
