Maritime Law Admiralty Jurisdiction and Courts 2

Question 1

Which Supreme Court case established that admiralty jurisdiction does not extend to fixed structures permanently attached to the seabed?

Accepted Answer

Rodrigue v. Aetna Casualty

Answer

Rodrigue v. Aetna Casualty (1969) held that fixed offshore platforms are extensions of the land, not vessels, removing them from admiralty jurisdiction.

Question 2

Under U.S. admiralty law, what is the statute of limitations for personal injury claims against a vessel owner?

Accepted Answer

3 years

Answer

46 U.S.C. § 30106 provides a 3-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims in admiralty.

Question 3

Admiralty courts apply the doctrine of 'laches' rather than statutes of limitations primarily because maritime claims are rooted in which legal tradition?

Accepted Answer

Equity

Answer

Admiralty is historically an equity-based jurisdiction, so laches (unreasonable delay causing prejudice) governs timeliness rather than strict statutory deadlines in many contexts.

Question 4

What is the primary purpose of Supplemental Admiralty Rule C in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure?

Accepted Answer

To authorize arrest of a vessel or cargo to enforce a maritime lien

Answer

Supplemental Rule C governs in rem actions and authorizes the arrest of a vessel, cargo, or other property to enforce a maritime lien or right given by statute.

Question 5

Which legal standard determines whether a waterway qualifies as 'navigable' for admiralty jurisdiction purposes in the United States?

Accepted Answer

The Daniel Ball test — capable of interstate commerce in its ordinary condition

Answer

Under The Daniel Ball (1871), navigability requires that the water be used, or susceptible of being used, as a highway for interstate or foreign commerce.

Maritime Law Practice Test

Maritime Law Practice Test

Maritime Law Admiralty Jurisdiction and Courts 2