Romero v. International Terminal Operating Company (1958)
- Docket
- 3
- Decided
- 1958-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: (1) Do U.S. courts have jurisdiction to decide the matter under the Jones Act? (2) Do U.S. courts have the authority to decide maritime law matters? Conclusion: Yes, yes. In a 7-2 decision, Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote the majority opinion vacating the judgment below and remanding. The Supreme Court held that the district court confused jurisdiction with stating a valid cause of action. The district court had jurisdiction to determine whether Romero had stated a valid cause of action under the Jones Act and pendant jurisdiction joins the general maritime law claims. The Court also found that U.S. maritime law does not apply as a matter of law. Justice William J. Brennan wrote a partial dissent, stating that he could not agree with the majority that the court did not have independent jurisdiction over maritime law. Chief Justice Earl Warren joined in the partial dissent. Justice Hugo L. Black wrote a dissent, expressing that maritime laws are independently within the jurisdiction of the federal courts and that the Jones Act does apply. Justice William O. Douglas joined in the dissent.