Opinion ID: 1347844
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Nexus to Traditional Maritime Activity

Text: The next question is whether the refitting of a ship in dry dock has a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity. In answering this question, [a] court, first, must assess the general features of the type of incident involved to determine whether the incident has a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce. Second, a court must determine whether the general character of the activity giving rise to the incident shows a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity. Grubart, 513 U.S. at 534, 115 S.Ct. 1043 (internal quotations and citations omitted); see also Sisson, 497 U.S. at 364, 110 S.Ct. 2892. The first assessment looks to potential effects, not to the particular facts of the incident, . . . whether the general features of the incident [a]re likely to disrupt commercial activity. Grubart, 513 U.S. at 538, 115 S.Ct. 1043 (internal quotations and citations omitted). We consider a description of the incident at an intermediate level of possible generality. Id. In this case, there is little question that this kind of accidentthe death of persons repairing and refitting a vesselhas a potentially disruptive effect on maritime commerce. The second assessment looks to whether the general character of the activity giving rise to the incident shows a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity. Grubart, 513 U.S. at 539, 115 S.Ct. 1043. The general features of an activity are ascertained by the general conduct from which the incident arose. Sisson, 497 U.S. at 364, 110 S.Ct. 2892. General conduct is not particular conduct. In Sisson, for example, suit arose from a fire aboard a pleasure yacht while it was docked at a marina. The general conduct was held to be the storage and maintenance of vessels at marinas: We need not ascertain the precise cause of the fire to determine what `activity' [the boat owner] was engaged in, rather, the relevant activity was the storage and maintenance of a vessel at a marina on navigable waters. Sisson, 497 U.S. at 365, 110 S.Ct. 2892. At that level of generality, the general conduct of storing and maintaining vessels was clearly a common, if not indispensable, maritime activity. Sisson, 497 U.S. at 367, 110 S.Ct. 2892. As in Sisson, the general conduct in this case is the repair and maintenance of a vessel, just as obviously an indispensable and traditional maritime activity. Therefore, we conclude that the activity giving rise to the incident had a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity such that the incident had a potentially disruptive influence on maritime commerce. The district court had maritime jurisdiction.