all right welcome to my channel and please don’t forget to like comment and subscribe today I’ll bring a topic about power of the officer navigation incorporation jurisdiction of your marketing claims and the rights to trial by jury in 1966 the rules which had governed admiralty procedure were unified with the federal growth of civil procedure or federal rules ending a long tradition of a conceptually separate Federal admiralty forum this procedural reform made possible the Joiner of admiralty and civil claims in a single action to such Joiner in his turn raised the issue of whether the plaintiff retained his right to a jury trial of civil claims brought in diversity when joined with non-jury admiralty claims officers navigation incorporation the fifth circuit wrote that Joiner of diversity claims with an admiralty claim against a non-diverse party operated to destroy complete diversity the court retained jurisdiction over all the claims since all were alternately chocolate in admiralty however the plaintiff’s story right which depended on diversity was lost this examines the opinion in power and concludes that the court confused concepts of substance substantive law with those of procedure producing results that conflict with this Sim with the scheme of federal jurisdiction established by the Constitution and federal law it is beacons by outlining the sources and procedural peculiarities of maritime law and also admiralty jurisdiction it next described this seminal Supreme Court decision on the relationship between admiralty and other Federal jurisdictions Romero V International Terminal operating Co and the Court decisions and federal rules which govern jury trial of admiralty claims the common then turns to the power opinion to demonstrate that contrary to the fifth circuit analysis claims based on Admiralty rest on an independent basis sufficient to support Federal jurisdiction undermining discord’s jurisdiction of diversity claims it is joined with them the comments shows that the power approach conflicts with this purpose of the admiralty jurisdictional statue of ensuring Merit implantives their choice between admiralty remedies and also procedures and come common loved ones the common next examines the federal rules and concludes that they both encourage and provide for jointer of admiralty and civil claims without destroying the jurisdictional and residual distinctions between them finally the discusses through the rights by trial jury in the context of situation in which claims are so unrelated as to require trial by a single fact finder the constituently the constitutionally protected right to a jury trial for civil claims must outweight the tradition of non-jury trials in admiralty maritime law conference and a wide range of cases connected with C varying activities it is a district branch of federal law with both decisional and statutory sources decisions are General maritime law is drawn from the maritime law of Nations which the federal courts have accepted and adopted under the maritime jurisdiction converted by article 111.6 statutory maritime law is enacted by Congress president to Authority found in the commercey clause and in article 111 read in conjunction with the necessary and proper clause an example is the Jones act which extends the federal employers liability Acts to see men those adding a claim for new clients to the strictly ability personal injury claims traditionally available under General maritime law historically three distinct forums were competent to hear Maritime cases fellow courts on their low side federal courts on their admiralty side and state courts the theoretical partition of the federal court into separate law and admiralty side was discarded in 1966 with the promulgation of the unified Federal rules of civil procedure which permitted admiralty claims and civil claims to be joined in a single civil action procedures unique to admiralty practice were retained however and the plaintiff who wished to invoke them as required to identify his claim on the rule as an admiralty claim any claim whose subject matter is within the Ambit of maritime law may be brought us an admiralty claim in federal court constitutional authority to hear these claims is found in article 111 the statutory power is granted by Section 1 Triple Three of title 28.7 section 1333 is substantively identical to its Forerunner in the Judiciary Act of 1789 which granted exclusive Federal jurisdiction offer Maritime cases but qualified the grant by saving the sweaters in all cases the right of a common law remedy where the common law is competent to give it this saving Clause has been interpreted as preserving the Swedish assess to the Common Law Courts which had traditionally exercised a concurrent jurisdiction of our Maritime cases so thank you for watching and don’t forget to like comment and subscribe


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *