The Tulane Maritime Law Journal is proud to present another installment in a series of forthcoming posts concerning recent developments in admiralty and maritime law written by members of the Tulane Maritime Law Journal. *This post has not undergone our full editorial process. By: David Bury Plugging the Leaks: The Fifth Circuit Expands and Clarifies the […]
Presented by the ABA TIPS Admiralty & Maritime Law Committee. Graciously hosted by Liskow & Lewis. Featuring: Bryan J. Kitz — Introductory Remarks Taylor Coley — Brokers and Buyers Beware: Underwriters are Nickel and Dimed by Strict Interpretation of Language in Excess and Umbrella Policies of Offshore Energy Companies Matthew Drenan — The Ninth Circuit Writes an […]
Please join us for a presentation of selected works from Volume 40 of the Tulane Maritime Law Journal. This event is being graciously hosted by Liskow & Lewis and is being presented by the Tulane Maritime Law Journal in conjunction with the Admiralty & Maritime Law Committee, Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section of the American […]
The second issue of Volume 39 of the Tulane Maritime Law Journal is now available. A big thank you to all of our authors and editors! To purchase a print edition, please visit here.
The Tulane Maritime Law Journal is proud to present an update to our post created by our Caitlin Baroni concerning recent developments in admiralty and maritime law.
The Tulane Maritime Law Journal is proud to present the second installment in a series of forthcoming posts concerning recent developments in admiralty and maritime law written by members of the Tulane Maritime Law Journal. *This post has not undergone our full editorial process. By: Brooke Bacuetes PROMOTING JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY: THE SECOND CIRCUIT’S EXPANSION OF […]
ADD POST HERE!
Admiralty jurisdiction has long posed a formidable opponent to those seeking to understand its subtleties. Fortunately, perhaps, for the maritime bar, substantial issues yet remain around its murky edges that require further discourse. The determination whether a products liability claim falls within admiralty jurisdiction can, at times, lead one into uncharted waters. This Comment will attempt to shed some light into the murky corners of admiralty jurisdiction’s reach so that those far wiser may choose an enlightened path toward the smooth sailing of logical, established precedent.
To accomplish this goal, this Comment will first briefly discuss the adoption of products liability into admiralty jurisdiction. This discussion will be followed by an in-depth analysis of the Supreme Court of the United States’ formulation of admiralty jurisdiction in the tort context, which is intended to give the reader a historical lens through which to view the current approaches. Next, this Comment will highlight the three approaches used by courts today in resolving whether a products liability claim satisfies the “substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity” component of the admiralty jurisdiction test.
Ninety percent of world trade moves on ships. These vessels are often owned by one party, managed by another party, then chartered and subchartered to additional actors. The shipowners and their home ports are spread across the world, creating the serious need for a predictable, uniform, and simple set of admiralty law rules that resolve disputes and make trade flow smoothly. In addition to appropriate substantive maritime law rules, it is important that the vessels’ owners be subject to process in national courts to allow for fair and convenient adjudication of disputes for all maritime players.
ADD POST HERE!