Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company et al. (513 U.S. 527)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 22, 1995 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 513 U.S. 527 · 115 S. Ct. 1043
- Decided
- February 22, 1995
- Term
- October Term 1994
- Vote
- 7–0
- Majority author
- Justice Souter
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. On April 13, 1992, water from the Chicago River poured into a freight tunnel running under the river and thence into the basements of buildings in the downtown Chicago Loop. Allegedly, the flooding resulted from events several months earlier, when respondent Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company had used a crane, sitting on a barge in the river next to a bridge, to drive piles into the riverbed above the tunnel. The issue before us is whether a court of the United States has admiralty jurisdiction to determine and limit the extent of Great Lakes’s tort liability. We hold this suit to be within federal admiralty jurisdiction. I The complaint, together with affidavits subject to no objection, alleges the following facts. In 1990, Great Lakes bid on a contract with petitioner city of Chicago to replace wooden pilings clustered around the piers of several bridges spanning the Chicago River, a navigable waterway within the meaning of The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557, 563 (1871). See Escanaba Co. v. Chicago, 107 U. S. 678, 683 (1883). The pilings (called dolphins) keep ships from bumping into the piers and so protect both. After winning the contract, Great Lakes carried out the work with two barges towed by a tug. One barge carried pilings; the other carried a crane that pulled out old pilings and helped drive in new ones. In August and…
Excerpt of a 39,502-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.