Legal Opinion
Bailiff v. Storm Drilling Company
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided December 1, 1972No. Civ. A. 5400PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
JUSTICE, District Judge.
Alleging improper venue, the defendant, Storm Drilling Company has filed a motion to dismiss this civil action.
Plaintiff Bailiff brings this action for damages for personal injury based on negligence under the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, popularly known as the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688 et seq., and also grounded on the doctrine of unseaworthiness. Since plaintiff’s amended complaint contains the appropriate statement identifying it as an admiralty or maritime claim under Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the complaint is sufficient to invoke…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Panama Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Pure Oil Co. v. SuarezSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- In Re the Louisville UnderwritersSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Atkins v. Disintegrating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Di Paola v. International Terminal Operating Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1968
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jerry Wayne Davis v. Hill Engineering, Inc. And Williams-Mcwilliams Co., Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- In Re McDonnell-Douglas Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Sanders v. Seal Fleet, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 1998
- Colonna's Shipyard, Inc. v. CITY OF KEY WEST, FLA.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2010
- ZDI Gaming, Inc. v. Washington State Gambling CommissionCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.