2013 US Code
Title 28 - Judiciary and Judicial Procedure
Appendix (rules 1 - 1103)
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (rules 1 - G)
SUPPLEMENTAL RULES FOR ADMIRALTY OR MARITIME CLAIMS AND ASSET FORFEITURE ACTIONS1 (rules A - G)
Rule D - Possessory, Petitory, and Partition Actions

View Metadata
Metadata
Publication TitleUnited States Code, 2012 Edition, Supplement 1, Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
CategoryBills and Statutes
CollectionUnited States Code
SuDoc Class NumberY 1.2/5:
Contained WithinTitle 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 28 - APPENDIX
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
SUPPLEMENTAL RULES FOR ADMIRALTY OR MARITIME CLAIMS AND ASSET FORFEITURE ACTIONS1
Rule D - Possessory, Petitory, and Partition Actions
Containsrule D
Date2013
Laws in Effect as of DateJanuary 16, 2014
Positive LawYes
Dispositionstandard
Source CreditAs added Feb. 28, 1966, eff. July 1, 1966.

Download PDF


Possessory, Petitory, and Partition Actions - 28 U.S.C. App § D (2013)
Rule D. Possessory, Petitory, and Partition Actions

In all actions for possession, partition, and to try title maintainable according to the course of the admiralty practice with respect to a vessel, in all actions so maintainable with respect to the possession of cargo or other maritime property, and in all actions by one or more part owners against the others to obtain security for the return of the vessel from any voyage undertaken without their consent, or by one or more part owners against the others to obtain possession of the vessel for any voyage on giving security for its safe return, the process shall be by a warrant of arrest of the vessel, cargo, or other property, and by notice in the manner provided by Rule B(2) to the adverse party or parties.

(As added Feb. 28, 1966, eff. July 1, 1966.)

NOTES OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES

This carries forward the substance of Admiralty Rule 19.

Rule 19 provided the remedy of arrest in controversies involving title and possession in general. See The Tilton, 23 Fed. Cas. 1277 (No. 14, 054) (C.C.D. Mass. 1830). In addition it provided that remedy in controversies between co-owners respecting the employment of a vessel. It did not deal comprehensively with controversies between co-owners, omitting the remedy of partition. Presumably the omission is traceable to the fact that, when the rules were originally promulgated, concepts of substantive law (sometimes stated as concepts of jurisdiction) denied the remedy of partition except where the parties in disagreement were the owners of equal shares. See The Steamboat Orleans, 36 U.S. (11 Pet.) 175 (1837). The Supreme Court has now removed any doubt as to the jurisdiction of the district courts to partition a vessel, and has held in addition that no fixed principle of federal admiralty law limits the remedy to the case of equal shares. Madruga v. Superior Court, 346 U.S. 556 (1954). It is therefore appropriate to include a reference to partition in the rule.

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. The United States Government Printing Office may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the US site. Please check official sources.