DORSEY

v.

CURTIN & JOHNSON, INC., ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Ed Freeman and wife Sharon Freeman v. Nw. Acceptance Corp., 754 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1985)
  …332(a)(1)1 must be complete; each plaintiff must have citizenship different from that of each defendant. Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267, 2 L.Ed. 435 (1806); Powell v. Offshore Navigation, Inc., 644 F. 2d 1063 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 972, 102 S.Ct. 521, 70 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981). This rule applies fully to parties joined under Rule 19, Fed.R.Civ.P. Lowe v. Ingalls Shipbuilding, 723 F. 2d 1173, 1177 (5th Cir. 1984). When it appears from the record that diversity jurisdiction may have…
• T.N.T. Marine Serv., Inc. v. Weaver Shipyards & DRY Docks, Inc., 702 F.2d 585 (5th Cir. 1983)
  …s case is that an action against the vessel in rem would fall within the exclusive admiralty jurisdiction and could not be brought under diversity jurisdiction. Powell v. Offshore Navigation, Inc., 644 F. 2d 1063, 1065 n. 3 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 972,102 S.Ct. 521, 70 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981). Other aspects of substantive law would vary as well, since state law applies to diversity suits under the Erie doctrine, while federal common law governs admiralty suits. To give one important example, admiralty…
• Kamani v. Port OF Houston Auth., 702 F.2d 612 (5th Cir. 1983)
  …atters which are “maritime but local” will authorize the application of state law. Kossick v. United Fruit Co., 365 U.S. 731, 81 S.Ct. 886, 6 L.Ed.2d 56 (1961); Powell v. Offshore Navigation, Inc., 644 F. 2d 1063, 1065 n. 3 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 972, 102 S.Ct. 521, 70 L.Ed.2d 391 (1981). Clearly, the State of Texas should properly have contemplated that when it consented to being sued for claims in tort some of those claims would be in admiralty. We have recognized the application of admiralty…