Also known as: admiralty claim · maritime claim · admiralty claims · maritime claims · admiralty · maritime
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A claim for relief that falls within the admiralty or maritime jurisdiction of the federal courts and may be designated as such under Rule 9(h) to invoke specialized procedures including third-party practice under Rule 14(c), the absence of a jury right under Rule 38(e), and interlocutory appeal rights under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3).
Aaron Adams, owner of a fishing vessel, sued Arcadia Retail after a collision on navigable waters damaged his cargo. He filed the action in federal district court, invoking the constitutional grant of judicial power over admiralty and maritime cases. The court exercised jurisdiction because the incident occurred on navigable waters and involved traditional maritime activity.
Austin Abbott sued Alpine Mining after a barge collision caused economic loss. The case proceeded as an admiralty claim in federal court. The Federal Rules of Evidence applied fully, including to the admissibility of navigation logs and expert testimony on vessel handling.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Amber Alonzo purchased a defective engine for her commercial vessel from Apex Dynamics. When the engine failed at sea, causing only damage to the vessel itself, she sued in admiralty for negligence and strict products liability. The court applied admiralty law to determine whether purely economic loss claims could proceed in tort.
Alexis Archer, widow of a longshoreman killed while unloading cargo, brought a wrongful death action against Apollo Energy in federal court. The claim arose on navigable waters and invoked admiralty jurisdiction. The court recognized a federal cause of action for wrongful death under general maritime law.
Audrey Ashton purchased a cruise ticket from Apex Dynamics containing a forum-selection clause requiring litigation in Florida. After injury aboard the vessel, she sued in her home state. The court enforced the clause under admiralty principles governing maritime contracts.
Anita Ali sued American Dredging Co. in state court after a maritime injury. The defendant removed the case and sought to apply federal admiralty procedures. The court held that state procedural rules could apply unless they worked material prejudice to the substantive rights under admiralty law.
Designation under Rule 9(h) permits the defendant to bring in a third-party defendant under Rule 14(c) for contribution or indemnity on the same transaction. It also eliminates any right to a jury trial under Rule 38(e) and authorizes interlocutory appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3).
No designation is required. A claim that lies exclusively in admiralty is automatically treated as an admiralty case for purposes of the Supplemental Rules and the special procedures listed in Rule 9(h).
Designation under Rule 9(h) waives the jury right even if another basis for jurisdiction exists. Rule 38(e) expressly provides that the civil rules do not create a jury right on issues in a claim designated as admiralty or maritime under Rule 9(h).
…of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American Law, 29 Colum. L. Rev. 1 (1929). The doctrine was also frequently applied in federal admiralty actions. See, e. g. , Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd. ; see also Bickel, The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens As Applied in the Federal Courts in Matters of Admiralty,…