Supreme Court Admiralty Opinions (Court Link)

Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC, 601 U.S. 65 (2024)
Choice of Law
Held: Choice of law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law, with narrow exceptions.

CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd., 589 U.S. 348 (2020)
Charter Parties - Safe Berth
Held: The safe berth clause of a voyage charter party was an express warranty of a safe berth made without regard to the charterer's due diligence in selecting the berth.

Dutra Group v. Batterton, 588 U.S. 358 (2019)
Jones Act - Unseaworthiness - Punitive Damages
Held: A plaintiff may not recover punitive damages on a claim of unseaworthiness.

Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton, 587 U.S. _ (2019)
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act - Choice of Law
Held: Where federal law addresses the relevant issue, state law is not adopted as surrogate federal law on the Outer Continental Shelf.

Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, 586 U.S. _ (2019)
Products Liability
Held: In the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when: its product requires incorporation of a part, the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that the integrated product is likely to be dangerous for its intended uses, and the manufacturer has no reason to believe that the product’s users will realize that danger.

Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 568 U.S. 115 (2012)
Admiralty Jurisdiction - Maritime Liens - In Rem Actions
Held: A floating home that was a house-like plywood structure with empty bilge space underneath the main floor to keep it afloat was not a "vessel." It was not designed in any practical degree to transport persons or things over water.

Pacific Operators Offshore, LLP v. Valladolid, 565 U.S. 207 (2012)
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
Held: The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. §1331 et seq., extends coverage to an employee who can establish a substantial nexus between his injury and his employer’s extractive operations on the Outer Continental Shelf.

Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha LTD. v. Regal-Beloit Corp., 561 U.S. 89 (2010)
Carriage of Goods/COGSA
Held: Because the Carmack Amendment (49 U.S.C. §14706 for motor carriers and 49 U.S.C. §11706 for rail carriers) does not apply to a shipment originating overseas under a single through bill of lading, the parties’ agreement to litigate these cases in Tokyo is binding.

Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp., 559 U.S. 662 (2009)
Charter Parties - Arbitration
Held: Imposing class arbitration on parties who have not agreed to authorize class arbitration is inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §1 et seq.

Atlantic Sounding Co. v. Townsend, 557 U.S. 404 (2009)
Maintenance & Cure - Punitive Damages - Jones Act
Held: Because punitive damages have long been an accepted remedy under general maritime law, and because neither Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 U. S. 19 (1990), nor the Jones Act altered this understanding, punitive damages for the willful and wanton disregard of the maintenance and cure obligation remain available as a matter of general maritime law. 

Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 554 U.S. 471 (2008)
Government Regulation - Punitive Damages
Held: The Clean Water Act’s water pollution penalties, 33 U.S.C. § 1321, do not preempt punitive damages awards in maritime spill cases. The punitive damages award against Exxon was excessive as a matter of maritime common law. In the circumstances of this case, the award should be limited to an amount equal to compensatory damages.

Sinochem International Co. Ltd. v. Malaysia International Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007)
Forum Non Conveniens
Held: A district court has discretion to respond at once to a defendant’s forum non conveniens plea, and need not take up first any other threshold objection. In particular, a court need not resolve whether it has authority to adjudicate the cause (subject-matter jurisdiction) or personal jurisdiction over the defendant if it determines that, in any event, a foreign tribunal is the more suitable arbiter of the merits of the case.

Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., 545 U.S. 119 (2005)
Government Regulation
Held: The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq., except when it regulates a vessel’s internal affairs, is applicable to foreign-flag cruise ships in U. S. waters.

Stewart v. Dutra Construction Co., 543 U.S. 481 (2005)
Jones Act - Longshore & Harbor Workers' Compensation Act
Held: A dredge is a “vessel” under the Longshore & Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. §901 et seq.

Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Kirby, 543 U.S. 14 (2004)
Choice of Law - Carriage of Goods/COGSA
Held: When a contract is a maritime one, and the dispute is not inherently local, federal law controls the contract interpretation rather than state law. The shipper is entitled to the protection of the liability limitations in both the through and ocean bills of lading covering the same shipment.

Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine, A Division of Brunswick Corp., 537 U.S. 51 (2002)
Government Regulation - Federal Preemption
Held: The Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971, 46 U.S.C. §§4301–4311, does not preempt state common law tort claims such as petitioner’s for the death of his spouse resulting from a boating accident.

Federal Maritime Commission v. South Carolina State Ports Authority, 535 U.S. 743 (2002)
Federal Maritime Commission - State Sovereign Immunity
Held: State sovereign immunity bars the Federal Maritime Commission from adjudicating a private party’s complaint against a nonconsenting State.

Chao v. Mallard Bay Drilling, Inc., 534 U.S. 235 (2002)
Coast Guard Regulation - Government Regulation
Held: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration ("OSHA") does not have jurisdiction to regulate working conditions where other federal agencies have exercised statutory authority to prescribe or enforce occupational safety and health. Since the Coast Guard had not exercised it authority with respect to the uninspected oil and gas exploration barge at issue, OSHA's authority to regulate the barge as a "workplace" was not preempted.

Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. v. Garris, 532 U.S. 811 (2001)
Wrongful Death
Held: The general maritime law cause of action recognized in Moragne v. States Marine Lines,Inc., 398 U. S. 375 (1970), for death caused by violation of maritime duties is available for the negligent breach of a maritime duty of care.

Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105 (2001)
Arbitration
Held: The Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §1 et seq., exempts from that Act’s coverage “contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.” This exemption is confined to transportation workers. 

Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U.S. 438 (2001)
Limitation of Liability Act
Held: Because state courts may adjudicate claims like petitioner’s personal injury claim against a vessel owner so long as the owner’s right to seek limitation of liability is protected, the Eighth Circuit erred in reversing the District Court’s decision to dissolve the injunction against suit in state court where it had protected the owner's right to limitation of liability.

United States v. Locke, Governor of Washington, 529 U.S. 89 (2000)
Government Regulation
Held: Washington’s regulations regarding general navigation watch procedures, crew English language skills and training, and maritime casualty reporting are preempted by the comprehensive federal regulatory scheme governing oil tankers.

About - Disclaimer

© 1999-2025 Todd Kenyon. All rights reserved.