U.S. Code » Title 46 » Subtitle Subtitle III— Maritime Liability › Chapter CHAPTER 301— GENERAL LIABILITY PROVISIONS

46 U.S.C. § 30101

Extension of jurisdiction to cases of damage or injury on land

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 46 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—The admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States extends to and includes cases of injury or damage, to person or property, caused by a vessel on navigable waters, even though the injury or damage is done or consummated on land.(b)Procedure.—A civil action in a case under subsection (a) may be brought in rem or in personam according to the principles of law and the rules of practice applicable in cases where the injury or damage has been done and consummated on navigable waters.(c)Actions Against United States.—(1)Exclusive remedy.—In a civil action against the United States for injury or damage done or consummated on land by a vessel on navigable waters, chapter 309 or 311 of this title, as appropriate, provides the exclusive remedy.(2)Administrative claim.—A civil action described in paragraph (1) may not be brought until the expiration of the 6-month period after the claim has been presented in writing to the agency owning or operating the vessel causing the injury or damage.(Pub. L. 109–304, § 6(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1509.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

30101

46 App.:740.

June 19, 1948, ch. 526, 62 Stat. 496.

In subsections (b) and (c), the words “civil action” are substituted for “suit” for consistency with rule 2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 App. U.S.C.).

In subsection (c)(1), the words “for all causes of action arising after June 19, 1948, and for all causes of action where suit has not been hitherto filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act” are omitted as obsolete.

Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 30101, Pub. L. 100–710, title I, § 102(c), Nov. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 4738, provided definitions for purposes of this subtitle, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 109–304, § 6(b), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1509.

Short Title

This section is popularly known as the Admiralty Extension Act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 141 cases (43 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Tandon v. Captain's Cove Marina of Bridgeport, Inc., 752 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tandon v. Captain's Cove Marina of Bridgeport, Inc., 752 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “” 46 U.S.C. § 30101 (a); see Grubart, 513 U.”
Atl. Sounding Co. v. Townsend, 557 U.S. 404 (2009). · cites it 2× “, and the Jones Act 46 U. S. C. §30101 et seq., both of which created new statutory wrongful-death claims.”
Adamson v. Port of Bellingham, 907 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “Because the permanent passenger ramp in this case is an extension of the land, and the Admiralty Extension Act (AEA), 46 U.S.C. § 30101 , does not apply to an injury caused by land-based equipment, we affirm the district court's ruling that maritime law does not apply.”
Charles N. White Constr. Co. v. MRA, Ltd. (In Re Biloxi Casino Belle Inc.), 176 B.R. 427 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 1995). · cites it 13× “White Construction seeks a declaration in its favor that (1) the Biloxi Belle II Casino and the Southern Belle Casino do not constitute “vessels” for purposes of federal admiralty and maritime matters and the Ship Mortgage Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq. and (2) First Trust…”
Germain v. Ficarra, 824 F.3d 258 (2d Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “46 U.S.C. § 30101 (a). As the Supreme Court explained, “[t]he purpose of the Act was to end concern over the sometimes confusing line between land and water, by investing admiralty with jurisdiction over ‘all cases’ where the injury was caused by a ship or other vessel on…”
Conrad L. Hoever v. R. Marks, 993 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2021). “” • 46 U.S.C. § 30101 (c)(1): “In a civil action against the United States for injury or damage done or consummated on land by a vessel on navigable waters .”
Apache Corp. v. GlobalSantaFe Drilling Co., 832 F. Supp. 2d 678 (W.D. La. 2010). · cites it 5× “§ 1333 and the Admiralty Extension Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30101 , and (2) the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.”
Ackerson v. Bean Dredging, LLC, 589 F.3d 196 (5th Cir. 2009). “[54] Thus, we affirm the entry of judgment in favor of the Limitation Defendants.”
MLC Fishing, Inc. v. Velez, 667 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “Applying this standard, we conclude that the ramp on which Velez slipped and fell is properly considered an extension of the land, and that this accident was not “caused by” the vessel or its appurtenances.”
Latrice Saxon v. Sw. Airlines Co., 993 F.3d 492 (7th Cir. 2021). “988 , 1006 (1920) (codified as amended at 46 U.S.C. §§ 30101– 30106), which provides a claim in negligence for injured sea- men.”
Zhang Bin v. Boeing Co., 792 F.3d 805 (7th Cir. 2015). “Section 30302 speaks of a cause on the water (or, after Offshore Logistics, over the water), and so does Grubart — for even if admiralty did npt initially cover water-based causes of injury on land, it has done so ever since the Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 46 U.S.C.…”
Aramark Leisure Servs. v. Kendrick, 523 F.3d 1169 (10th Cir. 2008). · cites it 5× “In addition, 46 U.S.C. § 30101 clarifies the extent of our admiralty jurisdiction in cases of damage or injury: (a) In general.”
Show all 141 citing cases →
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.