RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, Inc. v. Conder
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BAKER, Chief Judge.
Here, we must decide whether a riverboat casino that is indefinitely moored to the shore is a “vessel in navigation” for the purpose of the federal Jones Act. 1 We hold that it is not. Appellants-defendants RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, Inc., and the M/V Glory of Rome (collectively, Caesars) appeal the trial court’s order granting appellee-plaintiff Tina Conder’s motion for partial summary judgment and denying Caesars’s motion to dismiss Conder’s complaint. Caesars argues that the trial court erred as a matter of law by concluding that an indefinitely moored,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Seas Shipping Co. v. SierackiSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- McDermott International, Inc. v. WilanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Chandris, Inc. v. LatsisSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Stewart v. Dutra Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Conder v. RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2009