U.S. Code » Title 46 » Subtitle Subtitle III— Maritime Liability › Chapter CHAPTER 309— SUITS IN ADMIRALTY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES

46 U.S.C. § 30903

Waiver of immunity

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 46 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—In a case in which, if a vessel were privately owned or operated, or if cargo were privately owned or possessed, or if a private person or property were involved, a civil action in admiralty could be maintained, a civil action in admiralty in personam may be brought against the United States or a federally-owned corporation. In a civil action in admiralty brought by the United States or a federally-owned corporation, an admiralty claim in personam may be filed or a setoff claimed against the United States or corporation.(b)Non-Jury.—A claim against the United States or a federally-owned corporation under this section shall be tried without a jury.(Pub. L. 109–304, § 6(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1518.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

30903

46 App.:742 (1st, 3d sentences).

Mar. 9, 1920, ch. 95, § 2 (1st, 3d sentences), 41 Stat. 525; Pub. L. 86–770, § 3, Sept. 13, 1960, 74 Stat. 912; Pub. L. 104–324, title XI, § 1105, Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3967.

In subsection (a), the words “civil action” are substituted for “proceeding” and “libel” because of rule 2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 App. U.S.C.) and for consistency in the chapter. The words “civil action in admiralty in personam” are substituted for “any appropriate nonjury proceeding in personam” for clarity. The words “in rem or in personam in any district” are omitted as unnecessary. The words “admiralty claim” are substituted for “cross libel” for consistency in this chapter and with the various means of asserting a claim (such as by counterclaim or cross-claim) allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The words “with the same force and effect as if the libel had been filed by a private party” are omitted as unnecessary.

Subsection (b) is substituted for the word “nonjury” to clarify that the nonjury requirement applies to any claim against the United States or a federally-owned corporation under this section regardless of which party brings the action.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 60 cases (24 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: Wilfred Jones v. United States, 936 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wilfred Jones v. United States, 936 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “§ 30104 , via the Suits in Admiralty Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30903 (waiving sovereign immunity); an unseaworthiness claim under general maritime law; and a claim for maintenance and cure under general maritime law.”
Am. Cargo Transp., Inc. v. United States, 625 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “” The district court also dismissed ACT’s claims for unjust enrichment and money damages, concluding that the government had not waived its sovereign immunity under the Suits in Admiralty Act (“SAA”), 46 U.S.C. § 30903 . Finally, the district court denied ACT’s motion for…”
United States v. $4,480,466.16 in Funds Seized, 942 F.3d 655 (5th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “19RRCC incorrectly points to the immunity waiver in 46 U.S.C. § 30903 (a), but that statute also pertains only to certain admiralty claims involving the United States.”
Anthony Robinson v. US Dep't of Educ., 917 F.3d 799 (4th Cir. 2019). “§ 7433 (a) (waiver describing "United States"); 46 U.S.C. § 30903 (a) (same). The alleged waivers in the present case, by contrast, describe only liability against a "person.”
Abdulhalim Ali v. Robert Rogers, 780 F.3d 1229 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 3× “46 U.S.C. § 30903 (a). 1 That is, if a vessel is owned by the United States, and someone is harmed by the vessel or one of its employees, and the harm is one for which, if the vessel were privately owned, the harmed individual could have sued its owner in admiralty, then the…”
United States v. Park Place Assocs., Ltd., 563 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2009). “See 46 U.S.C. §§ 30903 , 31102. However neither statute contains a jurisdiction-conferring provision.”
Ironshore Specialty Ins. Co. v. United States, 871 F.3d 131 (1st Cir. 2017). “” 46 U.S.C. § 30903 (a); see also Thames Shipyard & Repair Co.”
MS Tabea Schiffahrtsgesellschaft MBH & Co. KG v. Bd. of Commissioners, 636 F.3d 161 (5th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “See 46 U.S.C. § 30903 . The district court found that, notwithstanding the Dock Board’s permit, § 2232© did not eliminate the Corps’ discretion to determine when and how it would conduct dredging operations in the Mississippi River.”
Garcia v. USA, 986 F.3d 513 (5th Cir. 2021). “1976)); see 46 U.S.C. §§ 30903 (a), 31102(a)(1), 31103.”
Savage Servs. Corp. v. United States, 25 F.4th 925 (11th Cir. 2022). “See 46 U.S.C. § 30903 (a) (“In a case in which, .”
Compagnie Mar. Marfret v. San Juan Bay Pilots Corp., 532 F. Supp. 2d 369 (D.P.R. 2008). · cites it 2× “See 46 U.S.C.A. § 30903 (b) (“A claim against the United States or a federally-owned corporation pursuant to the provisions of the SAA shall be tried without a jury.”
In re the Complaint of Ingram Barge Co., 194 F. Supp. 3d 766 (N.D. Ill. 2016). · cites it 2× “Specifically, the amended waiver provision reads: , In a case in which, if a vessel were privately owned or operated, or if cargo were privately owned or possessed, or if a private person or property were involved, a civil action in admiralty could be maintained, a civil action…”
Show all 60 citing cases →
46 U.S.C. § 30903(a): 1 case
Fiedler v. United States (9th Cir. 2026).
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.