Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Jones Act (2)
- Admiralty Jurisdiction Extension Act (1)
- COLREGS (1)
- Choice of law (1)
- Dormant Commerce Clause (1)
-
- International Safety Management Code (1)
- Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (1)
- Maritime (1)
- Narrow channel rule (1)
- Public Vessels Act (1)
- Punitive Damages (1)
- Ship Moorage Act (1)
- Stevedores (1)
- Suits in Admiralty Act (1)
- U.S. Coast Guard (1)
- U.S. Inland Navigation Rules (1)
- Vessel Traffic Service (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 38 of 38
Full-Text Articles in Admiralty
The Longshoremen's And Harbor Workers' Compensation Act And The Invitee Standard: Maritime Law Gone Aground?, Thomas W. Burt
The Longshoremen's And Harbor Workers' Compensation Act And The Invitee Standard: Maritime Law Gone Aground?, Thomas W. Burt
Washington Law Review
Considers the 1972 amendments to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, especially circumvention of the exclusive benefits provision and "redistributing the liability for longshoring accidents so as to promote safety in the industry."
Apportionment Of Damages In Collisions At Sea, Charles M. Davis
Apportionment Of Damages In Collisions At Sea, Charles M. Davis
Washington Law Review
This comment will consider the problems which must be faced by the courts and the bar in establishing standards for apportionment of blame and will evaluate the effects of the new rule on other rules and doctrines of substantive maritime law. Although the Court's decision in Reliable Transfer abrogates the equal division of damages rule, it leaves undisturbed several anomalous doctrines developed in response to the rule.
The Jones Act: The Employer As An Insurer; Constitutional Aspects, Douglas M. Fryer
The Jones Act: The Employer As An Insurer; Constitutional Aspects, Douglas M. Fryer
Washington Law Review
In Kernan v. American Dredging Co., the United States Supreme Court categorically rejected negligence as a test of liability under the Jones Act. Thus, for the first time the Court has stated what has been apparent for some time: that proof of negligence, in the common-law sense of the term, is no longer necessary to recover in a Jones Act suit. This Comment will attempt to trace the gradual erosion of tort theory as the standard and the re-establishment of what now seems to be liability without fault. A constitutional problem raised by this trend has not as yet been …
Seamen Are "Wards Of The Admiralty" But Longshoremen Are Now More Privileged, John Ambler
Seamen Are "Wards Of The Admiralty" But Longshoremen Are Now More Privileged, John Ambler
Washington Law Review
The State of Washington has greatly contributed to the strange result which is the subject of inquiry here. Two important cases leading to this result reached the United States Supreme Court from this State. One case was appealed from the State Supreme Court. One was appealed through the Circuit Court of Appeals from a decision of the United States District Court in Seattle. The cases are almost thirty years apart. To appreciate the absurdity of the present state of the law some background material is needed.
The Exclusive Admiralty Jurisdiction, W. T. Beeks, Gordon W. Moss
The Exclusive Admiralty Jurisdiction, W. T. Beeks, Gordon W. Moss
Washington Law Review
In Cline v. Price the owners of a minority interest in a fishing vessel, being dissatisfied with the use to which it was being put, brought suit in Superior Court against the majority owners. The action prayed the appointment of a receiver, an accounting, and a partition of the vessel by sale and distribution of the proceeds. A demurrer was sustained by the lower court and affirmed by the Supreme Court. The ground assigned was that the suit, essentially one for partition, was exclusively within the admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, and the state courts have no jurisdiction to …
Priorities Puzzle Under Ship Moorage Act, Orlo B. Kellogg
Priorities Puzzle Under Ship Moorage Act, Orlo B. Kellogg
Washington Law Review
The Ship Mortgage Act provides that a preferred ship mortgage, that is one which complies with the requirements of the act, shall have priority over all except "preferred maritime liens." It then proceeds to define preferred maritime liens as those liens arising before the recording and indorsement of the preferred mortgage in question, and also those liens arising from damages resulting from torts, those arising for wages of a stevedore when employed directly by the owner or operator, master, ship's husband or agent of the vessel, and those arising for the wages of the crew, for general average and for …
The Fellow Servant Rule In Admiralty Cases Involving Stevedores, Fred R. Boynton
The Fellow Servant Rule In Admiralty Cases Involving Stevedores, Fred R. Boynton
Washington Law Review
In view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Washington in the case of Havertv v. International Stevedoring Co., it becomes a matter of importance to ascertain just what the maritime law is in regard to the application of the fellow servant rule in cases where a stevedore has been injured as the result of the negligence of a fellow servant.
May An Action For Damages Be Brought In A State Court By A Seaman Injured In The Course Of His Duty, Or By His Personal Representatives In Case Of His Death, Under Section Thirty-Three Of The Jones Act?, Clifford M. Langhorne
May An Action For Damages Be Brought In A State Court By A Seaman Injured In The Course Of His Duty, Or By His Personal Representatives In Case Of His Death, Under Section Thirty-Three Of The Jones Act?, Clifford M. Langhorne
Washington Law Review
Section 33 of the Jones Act, amending Section 20 of the Seamen's Act of 1915,2 gives to a seaman injured in the course of his duty, or his personal representatives in case of his death, the right to proceed at his election under the provisions of the Employers' Liability Act. The last sentence of the Jones Act, it will be noticed, reads as follows: "Jurisdiction in such actions shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located." The question is, what is the meaning of the words …