Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peralta Shipping Corp. v. Smith & Johnson (Shipping) Corp.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 13, 1985No. 84-559Published

1Dissent

Justice Blacken, with whom Justice Marshall joins,

dissenting.

The admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts extends generally to a transaction that “‘relates to ships and vessels, masters and mariners, as the agents of commerce.’” Kossick v. United Fruit Co., 365 U. S. 731, 736 (1961), quoting 1 E. Benedict, Admiralty 131 (6th ed. 1940). Notwithstanding the broad sweep of the admiralty jurisdiction, this Court, since the time of its single-page opinion in Minturn v. Maynard, 17 How. 477 (1855), has refused to extend admiralty jurisdiction to disputes involving general agency contracts that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kossick v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Costas Hadjipateras, Nicholas Hadjipateras and Dimitri Dracos v. Pacifica, S. A., and George TsakalotosCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
  3. Minturn v. MaynardSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
  4. Peralta Shipping Corporation v. Smith & Johnson (Shipping) Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
  5. The Hinkins Steamship Agency, Inc. v. Freighters, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API