¶1 This libel in admiralty purports to state three claims. Two of the claims are for damage done by a boat to the libellant’s pier. To these claims, the libellee excepts. Although in matters of contract the test of jurisdiction in admiralty is the nature of the contract, the test of jurisdiction in matters of tort is the locality of the damage. Accordingly, there is no jurisdiction in admiralty over damages to a pier attached to land and the libellee’s exceptions are sus*1021tained. Cleveland Terminal & Valley Railroad Company v. Cleveland Steamship Co., 208 U.S. 316, 28 S.Ct. 414, 52 L.Ed. 508, 13 Ann. Cas. 1215; Martin v. West, 222 U.S. 191, 32 S.Ct. 42, 56 L.Ed. 159, 36 L.R.A.,N.S., 592; Hughes on Admiralty, Chapter IX
38 F. Supp. 1020
The Vizcaya
Decided January 13, 1941
Massachusetts District Court · decided 1941-01-13
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1945
1 district ·
Relies on Cleveland Terminal Valley Railroad Company v. Cleveland Steamship Company · Missouri & Kansas Interurban Railway Co. v. City of Olathe · Martin v. West
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1941-01-13
View the full empirical analysis of this case →