ask a maritime attorney

By David Weil

What are the time limits for filing a lawsuit under Federal Maritime Law versus State Law?

Founded in

QUESTION:

Two years ago I was injured aboard a boat during the Newport Beach Christmas Boat Parade. I waited a while to hire a lawyer, and when I finally had a firm retained, I was surprised to see that they filed the case in State Court in Orange County. I am concerned because I read that the time limit for filing a maritime personal injury lawsuit under Federal Maritime Law is three years, while the time limit under State law is two years. Is this correct? Should he have filed the lawsuit in Federal court?

ANSWER: I should first point out that if you are questioning your lawyer’s judgment this early in the case, you may want to talk to another lawyer (in person - not through a newspaper!). That said, based on what you have shared, it does not appear that he is missing any deadlines by filing in State court.

The answer to our reader’s question requires an understanding of Federal and State jurisdiction and the doctrine of Federal Preemption. Let’s start with jurisdiction.

“Jurisdiction” is the right and power of a court to hear a case and to interpret the law. We could spend a law school semester discussing the scope of “admiralty and maritime jurisdiction,” but it generally refers to a vessel accident that occurs on navigable waters or a contract or claim that directly effects a vessel’s operation, maintenance, repair, seaworthiness, or safety.

All U.S. Courts derive their authority from the U.S. Constitution, and when the framers of the Constitution addressed the question of admiralty jurisdiction, they simply extended the power of the U.S. Federal Courts to include “all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction”(historically, the terms “admiralty law” and “maritime law” had distinct meanings, but today they are used interchangeably).

To confuse matters somewhat, the extension of the federal judicial power to maritime cases was implemented with a clause that allows plaintiffs in most cases, at their option, to file a maritime case in State Court. The State Court judge in those cases will often need to apply the same maritime legal principles as a federal judge would apply in a federal maritime case. However, the attorney filing the complaint may prefer State Court for various strategic reasons such as the right to a jury. Our reader’s attorney filed their case in state court pursuant to this provision.

So, the case has been filed in State Court, but the choice between Federal and State law may not be immediately clear. State personal injury law in our reader’s case requires a lawsuit to be filed within two years after the incident, while Federal maritime law allows the case to be filed within three years. This is where we need to analyze the issues under the doctrine of Federal Preemption.

The Doctrine of Preemption addresses conflicts between state and federal laws. Preemption analysis considers whether a federal law or statute will preempt or take precedence over the state law. Such a conflict arises when compliance with both federal and state regulations is a physical impossibility, or when state law stands as an obstacle to the full purposes and objectives of Congress. In cases of a direct conflict, Federal law always prevails over State law. In our reader’s case, Federal and State laws regarding filing deadlines directly contradict each other, and as such the Federal law allowing a three-year filing dead- line prevails. Our reader’s attorney complied with the applicable law when he filed the lawsuit.

So, let’s summarize. Broadly speaking, this case is analyzed under two legal principles: “Jurisdiction” and “Choice of Law.” When analyzing jurisdiction, we must ask whether the court selected by our reader’s attorney has the power to hear the case. Yes, it does. Under a choice of law analysis, we must ask whether - regardless of where the case was filed - what body of law is applied in this case to resolve the legal issues? The answer is that it depends on which issue is being considered. As we saw in our analysis above, Federal law is applied to determine the deadlines for filing the case, but other aspects of the case would be evaluated under State law if there is no contradicting Federal law.

A discussion of jurisdiction and the court system may be of little practical use to the average boater, but these are important issues that need to be considered in litigation. An experienced maritime attorney can help to navigate a legal claim through the system.

David Weil is licensed to practice law in the state of California and as such, some of the information provided in this column may not be applicable in a jurisdiction outside of California. Please note also that no two legal situations are alike, and it is impossible to provide accurate legal advice without know- ing all the facts of a particular situation. Therefore, the information provided in this column should not be regarded as individual legal advice, and readers should not act upon this information without seeking the opinion of an attorney in their home state.

Fax (949) 660-6172

EDITORIAL/CREATIVE (949) 660-6150

Editor and Publisher Duncan McIntosh, Jr. duncan@goboating.com

General Manager

Kathleen Ford kathleen@goboating.com (949) 519-4745

Editor Katherine Clements katherine@goboating.com

Graphic Artist

Meredith V. Ewell

Contributors

J.R. Johnson, Bob Vanian, Catherine French, David Weil, Capt. Pat Rains

ADVERTISING SALES (949) 660-6150 Fax: (949) 660-6172

Susanne Kirkham-Diaz (949) 503-7693 susanne@goboating.com

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING (800) 887-1615

Jon Sorenson jon@goboating.com

SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES (800) 887-1615 jon@goboating.com

THE LOG ONLINE AND NEWSLETTERS thelog.com

Newsletters To subscribe to the Log's Newsletter, go to thelog.com

The Log, San Diego Log and FishRap are registered trademarks of Duncan McIntosh Co. Inc. Copyright 2023, all rights reserved. No part may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of the publisher.

News Briefs

From page 5 excursions are available now thru mid-April from Ventura or the Channel Islands Harbor departing at 9:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. Rates for half-day trips are $44 for adults, $40 for seniors, and $31 for children 3-12. Children 2 years old and younger ride free. All-day trips with landings and camping trips to Anacapa and Santa Cruz Island are also available year-round. In addition, both Scorpion Anchorage and Prisoner’s Harbor are now open in Santa Cruz. All-day trips run from $64 to $120 per adult.

Also, visit https://www.venturaharborvillage.com/directory/island-packers/ for more information.

NOAA Awards $20.5 Million for Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

In a first-of-its-kind deployment under Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds, today NOAA announced an approximately $20.5 million award for coordinating ocean and coastal resources around the country. The recommended federal funds will significantly enhance existing collaboration between states, tribal governments, and the federal government and provide needed capacity to advance their work.

Through this recommended funding, the awards will support projects to advance regional ocean partnerships and data sharing among ocean users and include the engagement of federally recognized tribes with existing regional ocean partnerships. Regional ocean partnerships are regional organizations convened by governors to work collaboratively across multiple states, in coordination with federal and tribal governments, on shared priorities and challenges.

“Advanced climate data is critical to helping communities act on the best available information when disaster strikes,” said Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo. “The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to addressing the climate crisis, and thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we can invest in collecting and disseminating lifesaving data to communities across the country, especially those that are often overlooked and left behind.”

“Equity remains at the heart of all we do at the Commerce Department, and this includes the continued effort towards environmental justice for our tribal communities,” said Deputy Secretary of Commerce Don Graves. “This funding is a necessary step in building on climate resilience efforts and protecting our coasts.”

“This recommended funding allows communities to better plan for future changes as we build a Climate-Ready Nation,” said NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad, Ph.D. “NOAA values the contributions of all partners to better understand and manage climate-related risks.”

A total of 13 awards were distributed to tribes and partners:

• $15.7 million went to four existing regional ocean partnerships — the Gulf of Mexico Allianceoffsite link, Northeast Regional Ocean Counciloffsite link, Mid-Atlantic Regional Council on the Oceanoffsite link, and West Coast Ocean Allianceoffsite link — to address increasing ocean uses, support sustainability, track climate impacts on shifting ecosystems and enhance regional capacity for sharing and integrating federal and non-federal ocean and coastal data.

• $1.1 million will go to four federally recognized tribes or tribal organizations — the Makah Indian Tribeoffsite link, Quinault Indian Nationoffsite link, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commissionoffsite link, and Quileute Tribeoffsite link — to support tribal actions related to the regional ocean and coastal priorities.

• $3.7 million went to five U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System regional associations — the Alaska Ocean Observing Systemoffsite link, Pacific Islands Ocean Observing Systemoffsite link, Southeast Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Associationoffsite link, Great Lakes Observing Systemoffsite link and will soon be awarded to the Caribbean Coastal Ocean Observing Systemoffsite link — to enhance regional capacity for sharing data and better integration of federal and non-federal data in regions without existing regional ocean partnerships. Funding will also help build new information portals to facilitate data access and data products that support regional coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes management priorities. Project descriptions can be found on NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management website.

Fast Facts

From page 4 tine station was transferred to the federal government.

After evaluating the quarantine program and its role in preventing disease t ransmission, the CDC pruned the program in the 1970s. It changed its focus f rom routine inspection to program management and intervention. The new direction included an enhanced surveillance system to monitor the onset of epidemics abroad and a modernized inspection process to meet the changing needs of international traffic.

By 1995, all U.S. ports of entry were covered by only seven quarantine stations. A station was added in 1996 in Atlanta, Georgia, just before the city hosted t he 1996 Summer Olympic Games. Following the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic of 2003, CDC reorganized the quarantine station system, expanding to 18 stations with more than 90 field employees.

Point Loma Marina

Jimmy’s Famous American Tavern

Open for Brunch Saturday & Sunday

Pier 32 Marina

Pier 32 Waterfront Grill

Open for Brunch Friday, Saturday & Sunday

Point Loma Marina, 4980 N. Harbor Dr., San Diego, CA 92106 619.718.6260 / pointlomamarina.com

Pier 32 Marina, 3201 Marina Way, National City, CA 91950 619.477.3232 / pier32marina.com