Document: 346 U.S. 556 74 S.Ct. 298 98 L.Ed. 290 MADRUGAv.SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY. No. 35. Argued Oct. 19, 20, 1953. Decided Jan. 18, 1954. Mr. Eli H. Levenson, San Diego, Cal., for petitioner. Northcutt Ely, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case sale a vessel and partition proceeds pursuant to California statute began in Superior Court home port vessel. The plaintiffs were eight individuals including Edward, Anthony, Joseph Madruga. defendant was Manuel Madruga on whom personal service had by summons. owned 15% interest undivided interests aggregating 85% ship certificated under maritime laws United States. owner challenged jurisdiction Diego court ground that only States district sitting admiralty could take consider such case. decided it upheld State Supreme which declined issue writ prohibition.1 40 Cal.2d 65, 251 P.2d 1. Certiorari granted state court's jurisdiction. 345 963, 73 950. 2 First. Article III, § 2, Constitution extends judicial power 'all Cases Jurisdiction * *.' And since first Judiciary Act, courts have all civil cases 'admiralty or 28 U.S.C. 1333, U.S.C.A. 1333. Whether this grants sell ships has never been squarely discussed but left doubt Story Steamboat Orleans v. Phoebus, 1837, 11 Pet. 175, 183, 9 677.2 Some lower federal appear support order sales partition, at least where there is dispute as use between part owners having equal shares.3 Other indicate should not exercise instance either minority majority interests.4 reasoning appears control ship's operations public interfere protect special indemnities bonds might require controlling majority. indicated obtain from proper showing.5 sold partition,6 even behest interests;7 others refused do so.8 However diverse holdings may be viewed,9 can no today broad over ply navigable waters are required registered enrolled series Acts Congress effect one passed September 1, 1789,10 Stat. 55. said admiralty's some circumstances extended rights title persons dealing ships. White's Bank Buffalo Smith, 7 Wall. 646, 656, 19 211. On other hand, held cannot variety actions change otherwise affect possession vessels. Steamer Eclipse, 135 599, 608, 10 873, 875, 34 269.11 We think, however, admiralty, developed years, enough vessels partition. brings us contention exclusive. 3 Second. Had simply exclusive states' ship. But did stop there. It went Act say 'saving suitors, cases, right common law remedy, competent give it'. 73, 77.12 Viewed superficially clause giving inconsistent with permits sue claims courts. former decisions clarified seeming conflict. Admiralty's 'exclusive' those causes action begun carried proceedings rem, is, thing itself treated offender made name description enforce lien. See, e.g., Moses Taylor, 4 411, 427, 18 397; Resolute, 168 437, 440—441, 112, 113, 42 533. kind rem proceeding entertain. jurisdictional act does leave 'competent' adjudicate 'in personam,' person, instrument navigation. Rounds Cloverport Foundry & Machine Co., 237 303, 306—309, 35 596, 597—598, 59 966. Aside its inability provide remedy cause action, state, 'having concurrent jurisdiction, free adopt remedies, attach them incidents, sees fit' so long attempt make changes 'substantive law.' Red Cross Line Atlantic Fruit 264 109, 124, 44 274, 277, 68 582. sense. plaintiffs' quarrel their co-owner, Madruga, ship, defendant. Thus acts upon parties personam, world large, would if therefore action. 5 Third. Petitioner contends entertain suit shipowners run counter an rule permit interests. Such national bind here, though grant See Garrett Moore-McCormack 317 239, 63 246, 87 239; Butler Boston S.S.S. 130 527, 557—558, 612, 619, 32 1017. detailed regulating shipping industry respect ownership, sales, mortgages transfers vessels.13 prescribed rules registration after sale.14 seen fit bar states making rule.15 Nor any established pointed out above, show varying ideas what adopted any. think call add congressional regulation attempting establishment Kelly Washington ex rel. Foss 302 9—14, 58 87, 91—94, 82 3. Cf. Cooley Board Wardens Port Philadelphia, 12 How. 299, 13 996. 6 scarcity reported involving indicates major importance world. foresee time possible injury commerce navigation continue follow own customary procedures. Easily accessible local well equipped handle these essentially disputes. Ordering property everyday work. Long experience enabled develop simple legislative procedures judges counsel familiar. Federal rarely called try disputes settled In parts country inaccessibility compared needless expense inconvenience parties. reason believe procedure applied simpler, speedier, less expensive fairer than we convinced theoretical benefits justify restricting fashioning govern quarreling shipowners. Halcyon Lines Haenn Ship Ceiling Refitting Corp., 342 282, 285—287, 72 279—280, 96 318. easily available, like pilotage laws, see 996, help fill needs vigorous navigation.16 Since absence produced few difficulties better let alone. Affirmed. 8 REED concurs judgment FRANKFURTER, JACKSON joins, dissenting. For another, co-owners eighty-five percent wished terminate enterprise found present petitioner, remaining fifteen percent, opposed sale. Accordingly they asked appropriate distribution among owners. claim made. There against petitioner; sort levy security sought obligation owing invoked exclusively If thing, sense meaning law, then concepts res esoteric I understand. From terms complaint through authorizing it, remotest suggestion separate underlying claim. Here thing—not outside ancillary sought. Knapp, Stout Co. McCaffrey, 177 638, 20 824, 921. Is doubted brought Oil Screw Vessel Liberty, Official 256332, fact entitled, inescapably deemed rem? To existence depend tenuous formalities questions matters maritime, courts, turn distinctions much too frail. Of course relief here sought, libel encroaching except when contest whose equally divided, adjudicated learning subject compelling. problem received fullest consideration Fischer Carey, 1916, 173 Cal. 185, 159 P. 577, L.R.A.1917A, 1100, substantially basis arguments elaborated, conclude nub holding 'the full complete touching matter indicated, say, dissentient strife must, nature fundamental rem—the itself.' page 198, 582.1 sustaining State's denied Carey overrule reached result did, because clause,' descended First 77, drastically modified 1948 revision Judicial Code. 1333.2 Reviser's notes completely refute view. construction given 1333 Court, argument need elaborated. 14 Once essential features rem,' Hine Trevor, 555, 571, 451, disposition clearly controlled They thus summarized Brandeis, member gave wider scope matters: 'A within jurisdiction.' 15 Constitution, drawn probably greater substantive law-making powers exercises area law. Osceola, 189 158, 23 483, 47 760. Broad implications clause, authorize decide policy, wholly untrammeled historic roots concurrently significant body applicable throughout nation diversity several States, creation system inferior authorized recognized every shade Philadelphia Convention. 16 Were vessels, very different question now before us, more assume differentiate small craft plying limited ocean-going initiative differentiations, regarding large. Whatever exercised ceding allow solely 'establishment world.' Court's finally disposing prohibition final reviewable 1257, 1257. 'The owners, unequal shares, not, direct sale, trade engaged voyages, properly called. employ voyages please; stipulation dissenting safe return ship; latter, filed it. manner, decline her all. So laid down Lord Tenterden's excellent Treatise Shipping. Abbot Ship. chap. 3, sec. 7. If, therefore, navigation, maintained.' thought rejected idea But, however be, he clear his book partnership believed Story, Partnership (1st ed. 1841), 439, n. E.g., Seneca, C.C.E.D.Pa.1829, Fed.Cas.No.12,670; Emma B., D.C.D.N.J.1906, 140 F. 771. Compare discussion Davis D.C.E.D.Pa.1828, Fed.Cas.No.3,650, reversed supra. Lewis Kinney, C.C.E.D.Mo.1879, Fed.Cas.No.8,325; Wing, D.C.S.D.Cal.1925, F.2d 389; Coyne Caples, D.C.D.Ore.1881, 639—640; 189—192, 578—579, 1100. Tunno Betsina, D.C.D.S.C.1857, Fed.Cas.No.14,236. Andrews Betts, 1876, Hun, N.Y., 322; Francis Lavine, 1874, 26 La.Ann. 311. Swain 1884, Minn. 429, 21 N.W. 414; Reynolds Nielson, 1903, 116 Wis. 93 455. 1100; Cline Price, 1951, 39 Wash.2d 816, 239 322. Citations varied collected Note 302, 1333; 90 Am.St.Rep. 378—380 1114—1116. England Kings Bench prohibited Ouston Hebden, 1745, Wils.K.B. 101, 95 Eng.Rep. 515. However, share later statute. Admiralty 1861, 24 Vic. c. 10, 8. applications decision, see, Guayaquil, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1939, 29 F.Supp. 578; Hirsch Pablo, D.C.S.D.Fla.1948, 81 292. 1949 revisions amended above clause. reads: '* saving suitors remedies entitled.' way narrowed original 1789 Act. Title 46 U.S.C., particular see: 11, limiting citizens corporations officers (from Dec. 31, 1792, 288); 25, prescribing form requires information description, builders, identity proportion ownership 9, 291); 39, requiring new alteration 14, 294); 808, placing restrictions aliens citizen corporation Sept. 7, 730, July 15, 1918, 152, 900); 921, providing conveyance mortgage shall valid grantor mortgagor, heirs notice, until record June 5, 1920, 250, 30, 41 1000). 34, provides process retains registration, owner's meeting legal requirements registry Mar. 1797, 498). noteworthy explicitly placed tenant, §§ 1347, 2409, 2409. Partition real estate belonging Oklahoma Indians 25 355, 355. compelled hold grew purpose prevent disagreement. Eq.Jur. 648. additional reasons modern policy facilitating transmission titles, joint holding.' Caldwell Snyder, 178 Pa. 420, 422, A. L.R.A. 198. (P)artition favored, secures peace, promotes enterprise; each own.' Cannon Lomax, S.C. 369, 371, S.E. 529, 530, 637. recently followed clause' read:

Category: 8