Stanley T. Scott& Co., Inc., a Washington Corporation v. Makah Development Corporation
This text of 496 F.2d 525 (Stanley T. Scott& Co., Inc., a Washington Corporation v. Makah Development Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
OPINION
Appellee Stanley T. Scott & Co., Inc. (“Scott”), a marine insurance broker, at appellants’ request obtained underwriters who subscribed Marine Hull and Protection and Indemnity insurance for appellants’ fishing fleet; Scott placed an oral binder for the required coverage and advanced the necessary premiums. The policy thereupon issued, and appellants failed to reimburse Scott for the premiums. The issue on appeal is whether Scott’s claim to recover its advanced premiums is within admiralty jurisdiction conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 1333.
[526]*526 Scott’s implied-in-law contractual right to reimbursement for the premiums is integrally related to the marine insurance policy that emerged from appellants’ bargain with Scott. (Cf. Gilmore and Black, The Law of Admiralty § 2-3, at 52 (1957).) A marine insurance policy is a “maritime contract.” (Insurance Co. v. Dunham (1870) 78 U. S. (11 Wall.) 1, 20 L.Ed. 90). Scott’s claim “arises out of a maritime contract,” and it is thus within admiralty jurisdiction. (Archawski v. Hanioti (1956) 350 U.S. 532, 76 S.Ct. 617, 100 L.Ed. 676; cf. Grow v. Loraine K (6th Cir. 1962) 310 F.2d 547.)
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
496 F.2d 525, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9281, 1974 A.M.C. 934, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-t-scott-co-inc-a-washington-corporation-v-makah-development-ca9-1974.