About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

13 St. Thomas L. Rev. 445 (2000-2001)
Maritime Law Uniformity and Federalism after Yamaha V and Dohsa Amendment: For Whom the Bell Tolls

handle is hein.journals/stlr13 and id is 461 raw text is: MARITIME LAW UNIFORMITY AND FEDERALISM AFTER YAMAHA V AND DOHSA AMENDMENT: FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS? ATfiLio M. COSTABEL* INTRODUCTION Four years ago, the Supreme Court in Yamaha Motor Corp. v. Calhoun (Yamaha)' held that the wrongful death of a recreational boater in state territorial waters was properly governed by state law, although the case fell under Admiralty jurisdiction. The decision caused scholarly concern that the fundamental doctrine of uniformity in maritime law could be seriously imperiled and that a demise of maritime law could follow. Later, In re Amtrak Sunset Limited Train Crash in Bayou Canot, Alabama (Amtrak),2 the Eleventh Circuit readjusted Yamaha, holding that a major train disaster caused on land by an allision of a commercial ship convoy with a railway bridge (causing the death of non-seafarers in territorial waters, like Yamaha) was governed by general maritime law. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, in a recent opinion by Judge Schwartz in the In re Diamond B Marine Services, Inc. (Diamond B)3 litigation, echoed the Amtrak court and distinguished the Yamaha factual pattern as one on the fiinges. Amtrak and Diamond B were concerned with accidents involving commercial vessels, characterized as your typical maritime case to which pure, unadulterated maritime law applies. The Amtrak and DiamondB courts seem to make application of admiralty or of state law dependent on the major or minor intensity of the maritime character of the factual pattern. How, then, could a case like Yamaha, sounding like a simple maritime but local' analysis, escalate into a general theory of federalism, to the extent of state law supplanting general maritime law? This article argues that one explanation can be found reading Yamaha's Supreme Court opinion not just in isolation, but in the context of all the opinions * Adjunct Professor of Law at St. Thomas University School of Law. J.D., Univ. of Genoa, 1962; J.D., Univ. of Miami, 1987. Engaged in the practice of Maritime and Admiralty Law. 1. 516U.S. 199 (1996). 2. 121 F.3d 1421 (1lth Cir. 1997). 3. 2000 WL 326155 (E.D. La. 2000), aff'd2000 WL 805235 (E.D. La. 2000). 4. See Yamaha, 516 U.S. 199 (1996).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most