Comment by Marc E. Montgomery
Although most small boat salvors secure agreements from boat owners in order to avoid litigation arising from salvage services, this is not always possible due to the urgency of many salvage situations, which require immediate action to prevent a vessel from being lost. As a result, salvors are often left with no other recourse but to pursue a salvage claim in court. The problem that small boat salvors face, however, is that the traditional remedy for vindicating salvage claims—an in rem action in federal court—is expensive, and awards for salvages involving recreational boats are often too low to justify the cost. This Comment discusses two procedural tools that may assist salvors in minimizing costs when pursuing low-dollar claims: (1) naming the insurer of a salved vessel as a defendant when bringing an in personam action and (2) bringing the salvage claim in state court.
Part II offers some background into salvage law, including the maritime policies advanced by salvage as well as the elements of a salvage claim. Part III discusses direct salvage claims against vessel insurers and concludes that under the general maritime law, insurers are indeed directly liable for salvage. Part IV addresses state courts' jurisdiction to hear salvage claims and concludes that state courts, while obligated to apply maritime salvage law, have jurisdiction to hear in personam salvage claims. By providing a more cost-effective means of vindicating salvage claims, these procedural devices provide salvors with increased incentive to provide salvage services to imperiled recreational vessels, which in turn serves salvage law's underlying policies of loss prevention and the protection of maritime commerce.
About the Author
Marc E. Montgomery. J.D. 2009, Tulane University School of Law; B.S. 2003, Rutgers University.
Citation
83 Tul. L. Rev. 1463 (2009)