Also known as: maritime laws · admiralty law · admiralty
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The body of law governing maritime contracts, torts, injuries, and offenses arising on navigable waters. It supplies the substantive rules and remedies applied when federal courts exercise admiralty jurisdiction.
Miles Montgomery, captain of a tanker owned by Mosaic Retail, faces federal indictment after the Coast Guard discovers hazardous waste discharged just beyond the coastal boundary. The district court accepts the case because the charges arise under federal statutes and fall within admiralty jurisdiction. Maritime law therefore supplies the governing rules for the prosecution.
Marathon Logistics sues Matrix Technologies in federal court for damage to containers during an ocean voyage. The plaintiff files on the civil docket and the court applies the Federal Rules of Evidence to all pretrial motions. Maritime law claims therefore receive the same evidentiary treatment as other civil actions.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Matthew Martinez charters a vessel from Morgan Financial under a contract naming London as the exclusive forum for disputes. When a casualty occurs on the high seas, Martinez sues in a U.S. district court. The court enforces the clause, directing the parties to litigate under the chosen maritime forum.
Michelle Murphy purchases a vessel whose turbine fails during a commercial voyage, causing only lost profits and repair costs. She sues the manufacturer in admiralty. Maritime law bars recovery in tort for purely economic harm, limiting her to warranty or contract claims.
Maya Malik purchases a ticket from a cruise line that contains a forum-selection clause requiring suit in Florida. After an injury at sea she files in her home state. The court upholds the clause and transfers the case, applying maritime contract principles to the ticket terms.
Monica Morgan, owner of a merchant ship, seizes enemy cargo on the high seas without a government commission. When the United States later condemns the cargo, the court holds that private capture alone does not confer title. Maritime law requires sovereign authorization before title passes.
Yes. Article III extends judicial power to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction and to cases arising under federal law. A federal indictment for dumping at sea therefore proceeds in district court even if the conduct occurred just outside territorial waters.
Supporting sources
A timely jury demand must be honored when the plaintiff files a civil action for money damages on the law side and invokes diversity jurisdiction. The presence of admiralty jurisdiction as an alternative ground does not extinguish the constitutional jury right.
Supporting sources
No. Article III places admiralty and maritime jurisdiction within the judicial power. Congress may regulate Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction but cannot transfer core admiralty controversies wholesale to a non-Article III body.
Supporting sources
Yes. The rules govern civil cases and proceedings, expressly including admiralty and maritime cases. Courts therefore apply the same evidentiary standards in maritime litigation as in other federal civil actions.
Supporting sources
…253, 257 (D. Douglas ed. 1955). A decade before the Revolution, England gave jurisdiction over Stamp Act offenses to the admiralty courts, which followed civil-law rather than common-law procedures and thus routinely took testimony by deposition or private judicial examination. See 5 Geo. 3, c. 12, § 57 (1765);…