33 U.S.C. § 628
Expenditure for dredging within harbor lines
No money appropriated for the improvement of rivers and harbors shall be expended for dredging inside of harbor lines duly established.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1980–2006 · leading case: Bloomer v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 445 U.S. 74 (1980).
Bloomer v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 445 U.S. 74 (1980). “The Act explicitly allows attorney’s fees in cases in which an employer declines to pay compensation, 33 U. S. C. § 628 , and in cases in which the employer brings suit pursuant to an assignment from the longshoreman.”
Draper Mach. Works, Inc. v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 815 P.2d 770 (Wash. 1991). “33 U.S.C. § 628 (1988). This left a stretch of waterway between the waterway line and the federal pierhead line (referred to herein as the intervening waterway) which was no longer being dredged and which was no longer considered by the federal government to be necessary for…”
Northlake Marine Works, Inc. v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 138 P.3d 626 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “33 U.S.C. § 628 . Federal pierhead lines are thus analogous to state harbor lines for purposes of maintaining navigability, although these lines need not be coterminous.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.