Oysterville Admiralty & Maritime Lawyer, Washington


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-620-0900

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

TIPS

Easily find Oysterville Admiralty & Maritime Lawyers and Oysterville Admiralty & Maritime Law Firms. For more attorneys, search all Industry Specialties areas including Advertising, Agriculture, Aviation, Communication & Media Law, Energy, Entertainment, Gaming & Alcohol, Oil & Gas, Science, Technology & Internet, Transportation & Shipping and Other Industries attorneys.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Endicott v. Icicle Seafoods, Inc.

... A. Background. ¶ 8 The United States Constitution extends the judicial power of the federal courts "to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction," preserving the general maritime law as a species of federal common law. US Const. art. ...

Maziar v. STATE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS

... 9 Under the United States Constitution, however, federal power extends to "all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction." US Const. art. III, § 2. This provision grants the federal government not only jurisdiction over maritime ...

PACIFIC SUPREME SEAFOODS, LLC v. HQ SUSTAINABLE MARITIME MARKETING, INC.

262 P.3d 63 (2011). PACIFIC SUPREME SEAFOODS, LLC v. HQ SUSTAINABLE MARITIME MARKETING, INC. No. 86146-3. Supreme Court of Washington, Department I. September 26, 2011. Disposition of Petition for Review Denied.