MARKS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Mrs. Catherine Spiller v. Lowe, 466 F.2d 903 (8th Cir. 1972)
  …Circuit which recognizes that today’s maritime law encompasses such a [*910] remedy independent of state law. “The admiralty has led, not followed.” China Union Lines, Ltd. v. A. O. Andersen and Co., 364 F. 2d 769, 798 (5 Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 933, 87 S.Ct. 955, 17 L.Ed.2d 805 (1967). Even if it may be argued that general maritime law still does not contain a survival remedy, it presents this court with no problem to find that the trial court properly followed the Arkansas survival statute (…
• Orange Beach Water v. M/V Alva, 680 F.2d 1374 (11th Cir. 1982)
  ….), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 824, 76 S.Ct. 52, 100 L.Ed. 736 (1955); see also Inter-Cities Navigation Corp. v. United States, 608 F. 2d 1079 (5th Cir. 1979); China Union Lines, Ltd. v. A. O. Andersen & Co., 364 F. 2d 769 (5th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 933, 87 S.Ct. 955, 17 L.Ed.2d 805 (1967); Parker Brothers & Co. v. De Forest, 221 F. 2d 377 (5th Cir. 1955); accord The YFNX-6, 156 F.Supp. 325 (D.Md.1957), aff’d sub nom Gosnell v. United States, 262 F. 2d 559 (4th Cir. 1959). Even given this limitati…