46 U.S.C. § 6308

Information barred in legal proceedings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 46 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no part of a report of a marine casualty investigation conducted under section 6301 of this title, including findings of fact, opinions, recommendations, deliberations, or conclusions, shall be admissible as evidence or subject to discovery in any civil or administrative proceedings, other than an administrative proceeding conducted by the United States.(b) Any member or employee of the Coast Guard investigating a marine casualty pursuant to section 6301 of this title shall not be subject to deposition or other discovery, or otherwise testify in such proceedings relevant to a marine casualty investigation, without the permission of the Secretary. The Secretary shall not withhold permission for such employee or member to testify, either orally or upon written questions, on solely factual matters at a time and place and in a manner acceptable to the Secretary if the information is not available elsewhere or is not obtainable by other means.(c) Nothing in this section prohibits the United States from calling the employee or member as an expert witness to testify on its behalf. Further, nothing in this section prohibits the employee or member from being called as a fact witness in any case in which the United States is a party. If the employee or member is called as an expert or fact witness, the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern discovery. If the employee or member is called as a witness, the report of a marine casualty investigation conducted under section 6301 of this title shall not be admissible, as provided in subsections (a) and (b), and shall not be considered the report of an expert under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(d) The information referred to in subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this section shall not be considered an admission of liability by the United States or by any person referred to in those conclusions and statements.(e) For purposes of this section, an administrative proceeding conducted by the United States includes proceedings under section 7701 and claims adjudicated under section 1013 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2713).(Added Pub. L. 104–324, title III, § 313(a), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3921; amended Pub. L. 109–241, title IX, § 902(e)(2), formerly § 902(e)(2)–(4), July 11, 2006, 120 Stat. 567, renumbered § 902(e)(2) and amended Pub. L. 111–281, title IX, § 903(a)(5)(B)–(7), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 3010; Pub. L. 119–60, div. G, title LXXIV, § 7402, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 1784.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (c), are set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Amendments

2025—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7402(1), substituted “proceeding conducted” for “proceeding initiated”.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7402(2), added subsec. (e).

2010—Subsecs. (c), (d). Pub. L. 111–281 made technical amendment to directory language of Pub. L. 109–241, § 902(e). See 2006 Amendment notes below.

2006—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109–241, § 902(e)(2)(B), added subsec. (a) and struck out former subsec. (a) which read as follows: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no part of a report of a marine casualty investigation conducted under section 6301 of this title, including findings of fact, opinions, recommendations, deliberations, or conclusions, shall be admissible as evidence or subject to discovery in any civil or administrative proceedings, other than an administrative proceeding initiated by the United States. Any employee of the Department of Transportation, and any member of the Coast Guard, investigating a marine casualty pursuant to section 6301 of this title, shall not be subject to deposition or other discovery, or otherwise testify in such proceedings relevant to a marine casualty investigation, without the permission of the Secretary of Transportation. The Secretary shall not withhold permission for such employee or member to testify, either orally or upon written questions, on solely factual matters at a time and place and in a manner acceptable to the Secretary if the information is not available elsewhere or is not obtainable by other means.”

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–241, § 902(e)(2)(B), added subsec. (b). Former subsec. (b) redesignated (c).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 109–241, § 902(e)(2)(A), (C), formerly § 902(e)(2)(A), (3), renumbered § 902(e)(2)(A), (C) and amended Pub. L. 111–281, § 903(a)(5)(B), (C), (6), redesignated subsec. (b) as (c) and substituted “subsections (a) and (b)” for “subsection (a)”. Former subsec. (c) redesignated (d).

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 109–241, § 902(e)(2)(A), (D), formerly § 902(e)(2)(A), (4), renumbered § 902(e)(2)(A), (D) and amended Pub. L. 111–281, § 903(a)(5)–(7), redesignated subsec. (c) as (d) and substituted “subsections (a), (b), and (c)” for “subsections (a) and (b)”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Pub. L. 111–281, title IX, § 903(a), Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 3010, provided that the amendment by section 903(a)(5)(B)–(7), is effective with enactment of Pub. L. 109–241.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: United States v. Nature's Way Marine, L.L.C.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Nature's Way Marine, L.L.C. (2018) ca5 · cites it 4× “However, 46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a) clearly states that no part of a Marine Casualty Investigation Report, including its findings of facts, shall be admissible as evidence in "any civil or administrative proceedings.”

Guest v. Carnival Corp. (2012) flsd · cites it 12× “Defendant’s Objections Based on 46 U.S.C. § 6308 are OVERRULED As noted, the Coast Guard conducted an investigation regarding the subject incident.”

In Re Complaint of Danos & Curole Marine Contractors, Inc. (2003) laed · cites it 5× “ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES Claimant asks that the report and photographs be excluded from trial pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 6308 . Respondents pray that while the written report shall be excluded under federal statutes, the resulting photographs should not be excluded as they are not…”

United States v. Egan Marine Corp. (2011) ilnd · cites it 3× “46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a). The broad exclusion provided by § 6308 is not at odds with Federal Rule of Evidence 703, which allows an expert to use inadmissible facts or data to form the basis of his opinion, due to the “notwithstanding any other provision of law” clause.”

Falconer v. Penn Maritime, Inc. (2005) med · cites it 2× “Exclusion of the Marine Casualty Investigation Report Penn Maritime moves in limine to exclude from evidence the marine casualty investigation report based on the statutory prohibition set forth in 46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a). Mr. Falconer urges this Court to allow the admission of…”

Coroles v. State (2015) utah “When interpreting the marine casualty reporting statute ( 46 U.S.C. § 6308 ), courts have rejected attempts to exelude an expert who has reviewed inadmissible casualty reports.”

In Re Eternity Shipping, Ltd., Eurocarriers, Sa (2006) mdd “See 46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a) ("[N]o *364 part of a report of a [U.”

Bean Dredging, LLC v. United States (2010) dcd · cites it 2× “This prohibition was based on the Coast Guard’s broad interpretation of 46 U.S.C. § 6308 , which provides that MCIRs are not "admissible as evidence or subject to discovery in any civil or administrative proceeding, other than an administrative proceeding initiated by the United…”

Credle v. Smith & Smith, Inc. (2013) njd · cites it 4× “46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a). Similarly, no part of a NTSB report, “related to an accident or an investigation of an accident, may be admitted into evidence or used in a civil action for damages resulting from a matter mentioned in the report.”

Gabarick v. Laurin Maritime (America), Inc. (2010) ca5 “See 46 U.S.C. § 6308 (”[N]o part of a report of a marine casualty investigation .”

Metropolitan Pilots Ass'n, LLC v. Schlosberg (2001) njd “(“Moran”) for summary judgment against third-party plaintiff Rodin Schlosberg (“Schlosberg”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, and on Moran’s appeal of the magistrate judge’s March 23, 2001 *515 Order to the extent it found that counsel for Moran violated 46 U.S.C.…”

Dept. of Transp. and Dev. v. Kition Shipping (2009) lamd · cites it 3× “*648 The DOTD contends that the USCG and NTSB reports are inadmissible based upon 46 U.S.C. § 6308 (a) and 49 U.S.C. § 1154 (b) respectively.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

— 46 U.S.C. § 6308(a) — 2 cases

In Re: Alexis Marine, L.L.C. (2020) laed

In the Matter of the Complaint of SDS Lumber Co as owner or owner pro hac vice and operator of the tug DAUBY ON 641327 f (2021) wawd

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.