TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Americana of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Transocean Tankers Corp.

AMERICANA OF PUERTO RICO, INC. v. TRANSOCEAN TANKERS CORPORATION, Northern Transatlantic Carriers Corporation, the London Steamship Owners Mutual Insurance Association, Ltd.

Americana of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Transocean Tankers Corp., 317 F. Supp. 798 (D.P.R. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, D. Puerto Rico · Federal District Courts
Decided
December 4, 1969
Docket
No. Civ. No. 346-68
Judges
Adillo, Andez
Citations
317 F. Supp. 7981970 A.M.C. 422

Opinion of the Court — Andezadillo

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER FERN ANDEZ-B ADILLO, District Judge.

This action is presently before the Court upon the Motion of defendant The London Steamship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited to Strike plaintiff’s demand for trial by jury. Said motion came on for hearing on July 19, 1968 and the parties were granted 30 days to file simultaneous memoranda after which the matter would stand submitted. The requested briefs in support and opposition to the trial by jury demand were not filed until November 28, 1969.

Having considered the arguments set forth therein, the allegations contained in the complaint and otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court concludes that this action arises out of a maritime tort. The complaint has been labelled “In Tort, Including Maritime Tort.” The Court’s jurisdiction is founded on diversity and jurisdictional amount, and alternatively, on the admiralty and maritime nature of the claim. There is no doubt that plaintiff, through the allegations of its complaint has clearly chosen to assert and identify its claim for relief as an admiralty or maritime claim within the meaning of Rule 9(h), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Having identified it as such, under federal Rule 38(e) plaintiff does not have the right to trial by jury.

Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the Motion of defendant insurer to Strike plaintiff’s demand for jury trial filed on July 12, 1968 be and the same is hereby granted.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1972: 11973: 21974: 11975: 11976: 11985: 11989: 22002: 119722026peak 1973 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Miles v. M/V HANSA CALEDONIA245 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (S.D. Ga. 2002)
  2. Williams v. Shipping Corporation of India, Ltd.354 F. Supp. 626 (S.D. Ga. 1973)
  3. Anderson v. American Oil Co.60 F.R.D. 676 (S.D. Ga. 1973)
  4. Edward J. Romero v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Trident Maritime Agency, Ltd.515 F.2d 1249 (5th Cir. 1975)
  5. Natasha, Inc. v. Evita Marine Charters, Inc.763 F.2d 468 (1st Cir. 1985)
  6. Alaska Barite Co. v. Freighters Inc.54 F.R.D. 192 (N.D. Cal. 1972)

Most recent

  1. Miles v. M/V HANSA CALEDONIA245 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (S.D. Ga. 2002)
  2. In re Armatur, Sa710 F. Supp. 404 (D.P.R. 1989)
  3. Siragusa v. Standard Steamship Owners Protection710 F. Supp. 404 (D.P.R. 1989)
  4. Natasha, Inc. v. Evita Marine Charters, Inc.763 F.2d 468 (1st Cir. 1985)
  5. Gilmore v. Witschorek411 F. Supp. 491 (E.D. Ill. 1976)
  6. Edward J. Romero v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Trident Maritime Agency, Ltd.515 F.2d 1249 (5th Cir. 1975)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list