1 U.S. Admiralty Law: Are We Drifting Away from Traditional Principles of Uniformity & Common Sense? By: George M. Chalos, Esq. CHALOS & Co, P.C. International Law Firm
2 Article III Admiralty & Maritime Jurisdiction Article III of the U.S. Constitution: The judicial power shall extend... to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.... The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that Article III s grant of admiralty jurisdiction refers to a system of law coextensive with, and operating uniformly in, the whole country. The Lottawanna, 88 U.S. 558, 21 Wall. 558, 575, 22 L. Ed. 654 (1875).
3 Article III Admiralty & Maritime Jurisdiction But does it need to make sense?
4 What is Admiralty? Black s Law Dictionary broadly defines admiralty as: A court exercising jurisdiction over maritime causes, both civil and criminal, and marine affairs, commerce and navigation, controversies arising out of acts done upon or relating to the sea, and over questions of prize. Also, the system of jurisprudence relating to and growing out of the jurisdiction and practice of the admiralty courts. To fall within admiralty jurisdiction, a claim must have a salty flavor. Kossick v. United Fruit Co., 365 U.S. 731 (1961). But when is a claim more sandy than salty? A. Elephant Corp. v. Hifocus Group Limited, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D.N.Y. 2009).
5 The Expanding Scope of Admiralty Jurisdiction 1991 Courts should focus on the nature of the services performed... In determining whether a... contract is a maritime contract. Exxon Corp. v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc., 500 U.S. 603, 613, n. 7, 111 S. Ct (1991). In Exxon, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the century-old rule that agency contracts were per se excluded from admiralty jurisdiction.
6 The Expanding Scope of Admiralty Jurisdiction 2004 The Supreme Court recognized that the boundaries of admiralty jurisdiction over contracts as opposed to torts or crimes being conceptual rather than spatial, have always been difficult to draw and held that the appropriate inquiry is whether the principal objective of a contract is maritime commerce. Norfolk Southern Ry. v. James N. Kirby, Pty Ltd., 543 U.S. 14, 23-24, 125 S. Ct. 385 (2004). A maritime case about a train wreck.
7 The Expanding Scope of Admiralty Jurisdiction 2005 The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that Kirby calls for reconsideration of [its] precedent concerning the boundaries of the courts admiralty jurisdiction. Folksamerica Reinsurance Co. v. Clean Water of New York, Inc., 413 F. 3d 307, 314 (2d Cir. 2005). Should the Court expand the boundaries of admiralty jurisdiction?
8 Then why have District Courts been slow to embrace change?
9 Then why have District Courts been slow to embrace change?
10 S&P / Supplies of Necessaries, Shipbuilding and Repair A ship repair contract is a maritime contract giving rise to a maritime claim & admiralty jurisdiction. New Moon Shipping Co. v. Man B&W Diesel, AG, 121 F.3d 24, 28 (2d Cir. 1997). A contract to supply necessaries to a vessel, or to provide agency services, is a maritime contract falling within admiralty jurisdiction. Exxon Corp. v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc., 500 U.S. 603, 111 S. Ct (1991).
11 S&P / Supplies of Necessaries, Shipbuilding and Repair A contract for the sale of a vessel is not a maritime contract. The ADA, 250 F. 194 (2d Cir. 1918). A contract to build a vessel is not a maritime contract. People s Ferry Co. v. Beers, 61 U.S. 393 (20 How.) (1858). A contract to supply materials for a vessel s construction is not a maritime contract. People s Ferry Co. v. Beers, 61 U.S. 393 (20 How.) (1858). WHY?
12 S&P / Supplies of Necessaries, Shipbuilding and Repair Only one District Court has taken the position that the Supreme Court s Kirby opinion overruled the general rule that a contract for the sale of a ship is nonmaritime. Kalafrana Shipping Ltd. v. Sea Gull Shipping Co., Ltd., 591 F. Supp. 2d 505, 511 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (Schiendlin, U.S.D.J.). No other District Court or Circuit Court has adopted Kalafrana or otherwise followed its reasoning.
13 Is the Jones Act Whack? The law has always treated seamen as wards of the Court, requiring special protections... But why are Jones Act seamen deprived of remedies that would otherwise be available? A Jones Act seaman may not recover punitive damages. McBride v. Estis Well Service, LLC, 768 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2014); Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U.S. 19 (1990). Jones Act seamen work on vessels but are their claims statutory or do they sound in admiralty? Jones Act seamen can demand a trial by jury, even though Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(e) excludes maritime claims from the right to a jury trial A claim for penalty wages does not necessarily fall within admiralty jurisdiction but may be brought as a statutory claim under penalty wage statute, 46 U.S.C , under the saving to suitors clause in 28 U.S.C. 1333(1). See Mylonakis v. M/T Georgios M, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D. Tex. 2013).
14 All Clear?
15 Service Contracts / Derivatives Disputes arising out of services contracts, such as brokerage contracts, do not ordinarily invoke maritime jurisdiction. Shipping Fin. Servs. Corp. v. Drakos, 140 F. 3d 129, (2d Cir. 1998). But other courts have recognized that brokerage has a significant impact on maritime commerce (see Kan International, Inc. v. Coastal Tankships U.S.A., 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 4800 (9th Cir. 1997)) isn t this the test set forth by the Supreme Court in Kirby? But disputes arising out of agency contracts are not per se excluded from admiralty jurisdiction. Exxon Corp. v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc., 500 U.S. 603, 11 S. Ct (1991)
16 Service Contracts / Derivatives Joint venture agreements to operate a maritime business are not subject to the Courts admiralty jurisdiction. The Detroit, 63 U.S. 330, 334, 16 L. Ed. 249 (1859) shouldn t this be revisited after Kirby? But forward freight agreements (FFAs) have repeatedly been held be maritime contracts; despite being derivatives or financial instruments. Flame S.A. v. Freight Bulk Pte. Ltd., 762 F.3d 352, 363 (4th Cir. 2014); Flame S.A. v. M/V LYNX, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (E.D. Tex. 2010); Transfield ER Futures Ltd. v. Deiulemar Shipping S.P.A., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5040 (E.D. La. 2012). Second Circuit: D Amico v. Primera stay tuned...
17 What is a Vessel? The U.S. Code defines a vessel as every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water. 1 U.S.C. 3.
18 What is a Vessel? This definition was seemingly broadened by the U.S. Supreme Court in Stewart v. Dutra Const. Co., 543 U.S. 481, 125 S. Ct. 1118, 160 L. Ed. 2d 932 (2005), differentiating between moored and fixed structures, and those capable of some self-propulsion. Led to many lower courts applying an anything that floats approach.
19 What is a Vessel? In 2013, the Supreme Court sought to clarify and limit this expansion, holding that the central question is whether a reasonable observer... would consider it designed to a practical degree for carrying people or things over water. Lozeman v. City of Riviera Beach, 133 S. Ct. 735, 2013 AMC 1 (2013). The Supreme Court reversed the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals and held that Mr. Lozeman s houseboat was not a vessel, looking to both its physical attributes and its use.
20 What are Navigable Waters? The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers follow the C.F.R. s definition: navigable waters include [a]ll waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. 33 C.F.R (a)(1); 40 C.F.R (s)(1). A body of water is navigable-in-fact if it is susceptible to use as a highway of commerce. The Daniel Ball, 77 U.S. 557 (1870).
21 What are Navigable Waters? But what about Utah v. U.S., 403 U.S. 9 (1971)?
22 What are Navigable Waters? The Great Salt Lake was deemed navigable in fact despite the fact that no interstate commerce or other commercial activity takes place on the lake.
23 What is an Island? United States v. McPhee, 33 F.3d 1269, 1279 n.9 (11th Cir. 2003) the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals, although recognizing that neither Simon nor Garfunkel has been identified as a nautical expert, cited I am a Rock and noted that the Court could discern no reason why something could not be both a rock and an island at the same time. (Nonetheless, the Court ultimately found the land mass in question was a rock and not an island).
24 Choice of Law Rule B vs. Rule C Recent line of cases counsel that U.S. law should apply in determining whether a maritime claim exists for the purpose of interference with property located in the United States and/or with respect to whether there is U.S. admiralty jurisdiction to enforce a foreign judgment that would not be deemed maritime under the laws of the foreign jurisdiction in which the judgment was rendered. D Amico Dry Limited v. Primera Maritime (Hellas) Limited, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS (2d Cir. 2014); Blue Whale Corp. v. Grand China Shipping Development Co., 722 F.3d 488 (2d Cir. 2013). Fourth Circuit recently followed these cases in Flame S.A. v. Freight Bulk Pte. Ltd., 762 F.3d 352, 361 (4th Cir. 2014). But what about Rule C? Why is a maritime lien claim different from a maritime claim?
25 Choice of Law Rule B vs. Rule C The Ninth, Fourth, and Fifth Circuits have all followed a three (3) step framework to determine whether a maritime lien exists: (1) apply a Lauritzen test to determine the law governing contract formation; (2) applying the controlling law, determine whether the contract incorporates the choice of law provision; and (3) if the choice of law provision is incorporated, evaluate whether the party acquired a maritime lien. Lien claims for unpaid bunkers ordered by deadbeat Charterers? But if the Vessel is arrested in the U.S. why don t Courts simply look to U.S. law to determine if a maritime lien exists? Why is Rule C different from what Flame, D Amico, and Blue Whale say?
26 MARPOL/APPS 33 U.S.C. 1908(a) authorizes the U.S. government to request that up to 50% of the fine paid by a corporate criminal defendant under APPS to be paid to the whistleblower(s) who provided information leading to a conviction. The whistleblowers who are fully participating in pollution acts which would otherwise be defined as barratry -- are induced by U.S. law to break company policies and international laws and regulations; to purposefully fail to report the known violations and take steps to actively hide the activity from the Owners and Operators; and to provide the tip to the U.S. Coast Guard in a U.S. port to obtain a big reward payout.
28 The Chutzpah Doctrine Chutzpah is a young man, convicted of murdering his parents, who argues for mercy on the ground that he is an orphan. Breneman v. Federal Aviation Administration, 30 Fed. Appx. 7 (D.C. Cir. 2002). Taxpayer cannot complain about not receiving notice when he moved without leading a forwarding address and then lived under an assumed name. Rappaport v. United States, 583 F.2d 298, 301 (7th Cir. 1978).
29 MARPOL/APPS 33 U.S.C. 1904(h) provides the following: A ship unreasonably detained or delayed by the Secretary acting under the authority of this chapter is entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered thereby.
30 MARPOL/APPS In Angelex Ltd. v. United States, 723 F.3d 500 (4th Cir. 2013), the Fourth Circuit concluded that a District Court lacks authority to review the Coast Guard s exercise of discretion to detain a vessel under 33 U.S.C. 1908(e) at the detention stage of the investigation. In so holding, the Court expressly relied on the government s own arguments that Congress, in 1904(h), authorized an after-the-fact statutory remedy whereby a shipowner could seek compensation for damages resulting from unreasonable delay or detention. But when Angelex has sought to pursue this after-the-fact remedy authorized by Congress, the government promptly moved to dismiss the Complaint. Angelex v. United States, 15-cv RC (D. D.C. filed Jan. 14, 2015).
31 Bottom Line: Is the U.S. Maritime Law Drifting Away from Uniformity & Common Sense?
Case 114-cv-05671-VEC Document 14 Filed 05/26/15 Page 1 of 8 This case is being reviewed for possible publication by American Maritime Cases, Inc. ( AMC ). If this case is published in AMC s book product
No. 11-626 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States FANE LOZMAN, v. Petitioner, THE CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH, FLORIDA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
September 14, 2012 Thomas J. Murray, Associate Director VIMS Marine Advisory Services Program Leader, Virginia Sea Grant Extension Program Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary
NOTICE Decision filed 11/13/09. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. No. 5-09-0128WC IN THE APPELLATE COURT
No. 14-438 In the Supreme Court of the United States AMERICAN COMMERCIAL LINES, LLC, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
APPENDIX D Legal Definition of Traditional Navigable Waters Waters that Qualify as Waters of the United States Under Section (a)(1) of the Agencies Regulations The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
SHIP ARREST IN PANAMA. The Republic of Panama with its strategic geographic position, democratic and stable government, and well established maritime judicial system, fully equipped to handle all types
Goodridge v. Hewlett Packard Company Doc. 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CHARLES GOODRIDGE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION H-07-4162 HEWLETT-PACKARD
No. 07-219 upreme eurt at i tnitel tateg EXXON SHIPPING COMPANY, et al., V. Petitioners, GRANT BAKER, et al., Respondents. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For
Case: 10-30886 Document: 00511566112 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D August 9, 2011 Lyle
Case 3:13-cv-01238-JPG-PMF Document 18 Filed 10/21/14 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #78 RICHARD M. O DONNELL, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS v. Case No. 13-cv-1238-JPG-PMF
Pacific Coast Congress of Harbor Masters and Port Managers 39 th Annual Membership Conference April 9-12, 2013 Keeping Ahead of Rising Tides But is it Legal? A Legal Smorgasbord for Marina Operators! C.
No. 00-214C (Filed May 10, 2000) ASTA ENGINEERING, INC., v. Plaintiff, THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. Lack of jurisdiction over maritime claims precludes Court from ruling upon bid protest involving maritime
Case: 13-60119 Document: 00512554303 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT GARY CHENEVERT, v. Plaintiff Appellee United States Court of Appeals Fifth
TRADITION. INNOVATION. SUCCESS. Dial In: 1 (866) 640-4044 Participation Code: 969427 VESSEL FINANCING AND ENFORCING MARITIME CLAIMS Paul N. Vance & Leon H. Rittenberg III September 20, 2011 Please note
Case 2:08-cv-01700-NJB-KWR Document 641 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ATEL MARITIME INVESTORS, LP, et al. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS CASE NO. 08-1700 SEA
The Fifth Circuit Attempts to Clarify the Interplay Between OCSLA and Maritime Law; Declines to Create a Zone of Danger Cause of Action Under General Maritime Law In Francis Barker v. Hercules Offshore,
PITFALLS AND PRACTICAL POINTERS FOR THE TRIAL LAWYER ENCOUNTERING A MARITIME CLAIM By Thomas M. Bond, Esq., Boston, MA A trial lawyer attempting to litigate a maritime claim without doing the preliminary
FAQs for Detainees in Marine Pollution Prosecutions Under what authority may the Coast Guard board a vessel? Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, a coastal state has full and exclusive
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY f/k/a DELOS INSURANCE COMPANY v. Civil No. CCB-12-1373 ALLIED INSURANCE BROKERS, INC. MEMORANDUM This suit arises
Case 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, VS. Plaintiff, HENRY D. GOLTZ, EVANGELINA
Feature Article Benjamin J. Wilson HeplerBroom LLC, St. Louis, MO Lu Junhong: The Seventh Circuit Stirs the Waters of Maritime Removals In Lu Junhong v. Boeing Co., 792 F.3d 805 (7th Cir. 2015), the United
SYLLABUS FOR MARITIME PERSONAL INJURY AND DEATH Spring 2016 PROFFESSOR JOHN F. UNGER 1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES The objectives of this course are to teach the substantive law of the subject matter integrated
Case 2:06-cv-04937-KSH-PS Document 36 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY NOT FOR PUBLICATION SAMUEL G. JONES, et. Al., Plaintiff, v. Civ. Action No. 06-4937
Case 8:10-cv-02549-EAJ Document 20 Filed 11/01/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID 297 TORREY CRAIG, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION vs. Case No.: 8:10-CV-2549-T-EAJ
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 20, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court LORRIE LOGSDON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TURBINES,
CASES AND MATERIALS ADMIRALTY SIXTH EDITION by Jo DESHA LUCAS Late Arnold I. Shure Professor of Urban Law, Emeritus University of Chicago 1921-2010 RANDALL D. SCHMIDT Clinical Professor of Law University
2015 IL App (1st 15-0693-U NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. No. 1-15-0693
Case 2:08-cv-01740-MLCF-DEK Document 37 Filed 05/21/08 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ARTHUR MONTEGUT, SR. CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 08-1740 BUNGE NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
Case 3:05-cv-01771-G Document 35 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 6 PageID 288 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOEL N. COHEN, VS. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, NCO FINANCIAL
Punitive Damages, Today and Beyond A Crucial Evolving Maritime Issue Insurability and Issues of Insuring John Weber, CPCU May 21, 2014 Punitive Damages - Basic Description Punitive, Exemplary or Vindictive
Determining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code (the Code ) provides the means by which a debtor or trustee in bankruptcy may seek a determination
Case: 14-50895 Document: 00513153752 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/13/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED August 13, 2015 ANA GARCIA
Case 6:09-cv-02099-GAP-DAB Document 37 Filed 04/08/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID 181 NURETTIN MAYAKAN, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION -vs- Case No. 6:09-cv-2099-Orl-31DAB
ELBERT KIRBY, JR.; CALEB MEADOWS, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit TENTH CIRCUIT February 5, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. Plaintiffs - Appellants,
Case: 13-31130 Document: 00512847813 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/24/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 24, 2014 Lyle
Asbestos Liabilities: Jones Act Damages Limitations Should Be Extended To Nonemployer Product Supplier Defendants Chris M. Temple email@example.com 412.355.6343 y Jeffrey N. Kinsey firstname.lastname@example.org 412.355.8231
Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 JOHN and JOANNA ROBERTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 8:13-cv-1731-T-33TBM
INTRODUCTORY COMMENT These instructions were prepared for use in an action brought under maritime common law and the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. 688, by a "seaman" against his or her employer. The instructions
Recognition of a Maritime Lien for Attorney s fees By Gregory C. Buffalow * Routine awards of a maritime lien for attorney s fees against a vessel should be recognized as necessaries, within the meaning
Case 3:15-cv-00333-JLH Document 39 Filed 04/13/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION NUCOR STEEL-ARKANSAS; and NUCOR-YAMATO STEEL COMPANY PLAINTIFFS
SECOND DIVISION FILED: July 3, 2007 No. 1-06-3178 MELISSA CALLAHAN, ) APPEAL FROM THE ) CIRCUIT COURT OF Plaintiff-Appellant, ) COOK COUNTY ) v. ) ) No. 05 L 006795 EDGEWATER CARE & REHABILITATION CENTER,
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 email@example.com Whistleblower Claims: Are You Covered? Law360, New
Case 14-4626, Document 75-2, 03/16/2015, 1461986, Page1 of 8 14-4626 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit DANIEL BERMAN, -v.- Plaintiff-Appellant, NEO@OGILVY LLC AND WPP GROUP USA,
Case: 09-60402 Document: 00511062860 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D March 25, 2010 Charles
Public Land and Resources Law Review Volume 0 Fall 2013 Case Summaries Anderson Brothers, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. Katelyn J. Hepburn University of Montana School of Law, firstname.lastname@example.org
Case: 11-13737 Date Filed: 11/06/2012 Page: 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 11-13737 [DO NOT PUBLISH] D.C. Docket Nos. 8:10-cv-02360-VMC ; 8:90-bk-10016-PMG In
Case: 12-16291 Date Filed: 06/17/2013 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-16291 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 0:12-cv-61429-RSR MICHAEL
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS CALVERT BAIL BOND AGENCY, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION March 10, 2016 9:00 a.m. v No. 324824 St. Clair Circuit Court COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR, LC No. 13-002205-CZ
Case :0-cv-0-AWI-SAB Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 FOX HOLLOW OF TURLOCK OWNER S ASSOCIATION, et. al., v. Plaintiffs, RICHARD SINCLAIR, et al., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 0 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 17th day of October, 200, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2005-C -249 CHARLES ALBERT AND
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA In Re JUNG BEA HAN and Case No. 00-42086 HYUNG SOOK HAN, Debtors. JUNG BEA HAN, Plaintiff. v. Adv. No. 05-03012 GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE
A ADMIRALTY LAWYER S COMME TS O RECE T DEVELOPME TS CO CER I G THE MO TREAL CO VE TIO A D AIR FREIGHT FORWARDERS SEEKI G I DEM IFICATIO FROM AIR CARRIERS 2/22/11 Peter D. Clark at www.navlaw.com Air cargo
Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases This article originally appeared in The Legal Intelligencer on May 1, 2013 As an intellectual property attorney, the federal jurisdiction of patent-related
Supreme Court of Florida POLSTON, J. No. SC14-1282 VICKI THOMAS, et al., Appellants, vs. CLEAN ENERGY COASTAL CORRIDOR, etc., et al., Appellees. [October 1, 2015] This case is before the Court on appeal
Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 104 Filed 01/23/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. No. 06-2026-CM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CATHERINE HOWELL, et al. Plaintiffs v. STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANIES, et al. Defendants Civil No. L-04-1494 MEMORANDUM This is a proposed
Case: 09-30299 Document: 0051998279 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/07/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D January 7, 2010 Summary
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2009 ME 92 Docket: WCB-08-663 Argued: May 20, 2009 Decided: August 18, 2009 Reporter of Decisions Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, ALEXANDER, LEVY, SILVER, MEAD,
MARITIME LIEN FOR SEAFARERS WAGES IN HONG KONG This Guide deals with the rights of seafarers of any nationality to unpaid or underpaid wages in respect of Hong Kong flagged ships, and foreign ships which
PERSONAL INJURIES AND DEATHS IN THE USA This Guide explains national law when seafarers are injured or killed in a port in the USA or on a USA flagged ship. This document is not intended to be legal advice,
Opinion issued June 11, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00636-CV SINHUE TEMPLOS, Appellant V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 333rd District Court
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. v. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY et al Doc. 324 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT --------------------------------x STATE OF CONNECTICUT : COMMISSIONER OF LABOR, : : Plaintiff, v. : : CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE : COMPANIES, : : Defendant.
ARK.] INS. CO. V. HESLIP 319 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Bruce A. HESLIP 91-300 832 S.W.2d 463 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered May 11, 1992. MOTIONS MOTION DENIED BY TRIAL
Maritime law of salvage and analysis of laws protecting the salvor s Interest Francis Lansakara 1 ABSTRACT: Under maritime law salvage is encouraged and given priority with respect to salvage awards in
ACC Houston Chapter Meeting Indemnities and Insurance: Managing Risks Via Contracts in the Post-Macondo World April 9, 2013 Panelists Lisa Brown Managing Counsel, Oxy Permian Former outside counsel. Received
2015 IL App (1st) 141310-U FIRST DIVISION October 5, 2015 No. 1-14-1310 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
SHIP ARREST FOR SEAFARERS WAGES IN SINGAPORE This Guide deals with the rights of seafarers of any nationality to arrest a ship for unpaid or underpaid wages in a port in Singapore. This document is not
USING LAWYERS IN SOUTH KOREA This Guide deals in general terms with using lawyers in South Korea. It aims to help a seafarer understand the legal profession in South Korea, and how to select, engage, and
FRANK DONALD WILLIAMS; DANIEL LARRY; DANIEL LABATO; JOSEPH STONE; STEPHANIE SLATER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit TENTH CIRCUIT
Case 3:14-mc-00009-B Document 9 Filed 06/09/14 Page 1 of 10 PageID 332 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION BERKLEY REGIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, V. No.
Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION TAMMY FABIAN, v. Plaintiffs, CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 15 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 26th day of February, 2008, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2007-CC-1091 FREY PLUMBING
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012 Opinion filed September 19, 2012. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D12-353 Lower Tribunal No.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit YVONNE MURPHY HICKMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee 2015-5134 Appeal from the
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 14206 Filed 02/19/15 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA In re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, on
Opinion issued April 19, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-15-00361-CV FREDDIE L. WALKER, Appellant V. RISSIE OWENS, PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND
EEOC v. Union Pacific Railroad Company Doc. 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. Case No. 14-mc-0052 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
In This Issue Volume 7, Number 6 / June 2010 Vacating a Judgment under Rule 60(b)(4): A Review of the Espinosa Decision Tax Claims in Transnational Insolvencies: A "Revenue Rule" Approach ABI's 17th Annual
Commercial Shipping and the Jones Act William H. Armstrong Armstrong & Associates LLP 1 Kaiser Plaza, Suite 625 Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 433 1830 (510) 433 1836 [fax] email@example.com William
Forum Shopping and Limitations on Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction John D. Snethen Section Chief, Tax Litigation Office of the Attorney General of Indiana 1 Bankruptcy Background What is Forum Shopping? Taxpayer
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHRISTOPHER AYDEN BREWSTER, individually, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUN TRUST MORTGAGE, INC., Defendant, No. 12-56560 D.C. No. 3:12-cv-00448-