How the navy law and Kim Kardashian's curiosity case apply - FWI

 

How the navy law and Kim Kardashian's curiosity case apply - FWI

In this episode of FreightWaves Insider, Dooner collaborates with Lauren Beagen, a professor at Roger Williams University School of Law. They talk about how the world of maritime law works. With the supply chain under pressure, the repercussions of the production of stumbling blocks and ongoing port overcrowding, shipping has become a risky business.

 

Also, Kim Kardashian sent an ancient Roman statue to the Port of LA. Are you in trouble?

 

Beagen brings to the show a sea of ​​knowledge as he once worked for the Federal Maritime Commission and MassPort. He is currently the CEO of US Merchant Marine and Coast Guard and is the principal at Squall Strategies LLC.

 

Subscribe to FreightWaves Insider wherever you find your podcasts and never miss an episode. New shows come down every Thursday.

 

Listen to many FreightWaves Podcasts

Impact of Maritime Law Powers

In 1875, General Moultrie became the first towing point built in the United States and used on the Charleston River - until it sank within a year. At the same time, the city of Houston and other port cities built companies such as the Buffalo Bayou Ship Channel Company to build ships with the specific purpose of removing and connecting waterways for commercial vehicles. In the late 19th century, the cutter suction dredge made its appearance and dug well and maintained the waterways. The Foreign Dredge Act of 1906 prohibits imported or chartered vessels from entering U.S. waters.

 

From its earliest days, it can easily be argued that the pull back is important for the security and economy of the United States. Modern day deforestation maintains the smooth flow of our inland ports and water, restores wetlands and rebuilt beaches that are exposed to the country's borders.

 

The U.S. maritime transport system reportedly receives one quarter of the U.S. economy. Lack of nutrient towing and increased shipwreck have left many U.S. ports with full depth and width only 35% of the time. Recently, the US Congress invested $ 10 billion in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to hold the ports. The Corps of Engineers has also announced the immersion of the Mississippi River from its mouth to Baton Rouge, La., To provide a 50-meter framework for 256 deep water businesses. Each additional foot of water is equivalent to $ 1 million per cargo per ship, which contributes to our national economy by $ 127 million per year.

 

While the impact of adherence to our economy is widely known, the impact of focusing on the development of general maritime law by decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. He is often overlooked. Our U.S. drag industry It has had an impact on our laws and the economy. High Court drag charges have been the subject of copyright, legal and general maritime law issues since its inception. An overview of the Supreme Court case shows various effects:

 

1883 - Atlantic Works v. Brady The controversy arose over the construction of collateral and the patent operation in part. The Supreme Court stated that the drafting of our patent laws was to reward those who made “useful and useful new discoveries” that also evolved into practical art.

 

1907 - Ellis v. Eastern Dredging Members of pre-deducted employees were subject to eight hours of work for employees and technicians as defined under the hourly law. At present, our Fair Labor Standards Act can be set aside for sailors.

 

1920 - U.S. v. Atlantic DredgingIn a state dispute, referred to the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that the private contractor could properly rely on government representatives in his mining contract as it would be a warranty.

 

1923 - Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co v. Kierejewski The Supreme Court ruled that state courts have jurisdiction to rule the sea on an innocent death charge under the "locality test" and state law enforcement actions have not been able to prevent maritime law.

 

1932 - Brooklyn v. Eastern Dist. The government's dredge collided with the pull. An error was detected. The Supreme Court reviewed the question of loss of use / reduction of damage and the duty of the shipowner to minimize the damage caused by the collision - the doctrine of the "holding vessel" is still used in the consideration of loss of use applications.

 

1943 - O'Donnell v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co A sailor was injured while repairing an underground pipeline. The Supreme Court extended the Jones Act's solution to him since the sailor was on board even though he was not injured on the ship. Site assessment did not determine the solution, but rather the magnitude of the task.

 

1943 - Standard Dredging Corp. v. Murphy and Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co v. Huffman These two resolutions reviewed whether the state tax regulation is constitutional and applicable to maritime trade and emphasized the conflict between state and maritime authorities and laws.

 

1956 - Senko v. Lacrosse Dredging Corp. A craftsman who provided standard waste storage was injured in an explosion and was charged under Jones' Act. The Court said the judge had a broad understanding in determining the fact that a "manual worker" should be considered a "member of staff" for the purposes of the Jones Act position. The three-member dispute questioned whether Senko was permanently attached to the merchant ship. The debate continues.

 

1958 - Kernan v. Am. Dredging Co. The fire broke out in Moscow for breaking the law. In a rare case, the Supreme Court has found “individual negligence” (in which case an error exists as a rule in the event of an injury-related violation). Private negligence still exists under common maritime law.

 

1994 - Am. Dredging v. Miller As a rule, state law only applies where you do not live