"Sisson [the vessel owner] has also argued throughout this
litigation that the [Limitation Act] provides an independent basis
for federal jurisdiction. Respondents contend that the Act does not
create jurisdiction, but instead may be invoked only in cases
otherwise within the maritime jurisdiction of [28 U.S.C.] §
1333(1). We need not decide which party is correct, for even were
we to agree that the [Limitation Act] does not independently
provide a basis for this action, § 1333(1) is sufficient to
confer jurisdiction." Sisson v. Ruby, 497 U.S. 358, 359 n.1
(1990).
Whether to seek to apply general maritime law to an incident is
not always obvious and the consequences can be even less apparent.
For example, when confirming arrangements for a hearing in the King
County Superior Court in Seattle, Washington, on an unrelated tour
bus case, I learned a verdict was about to be read in a nearby
courtroom after a months-long trial had ended in February. The
case, brought on
