Herman Family Revocable Trust v. Teddy Bear

Good Law
254 F.3d 802·2001 WL 649897·2001 A.M.C. 2064
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 13, 2001Nos. 99-56865, 99-56981California2,437 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McKeown, J.

This case illustrates the pitfall of proceeding through trial where the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The case centers on the aborted sale of the vessel Teddy Bear, a 62-foot power boat. Howard Littell, on behalf of a private family trust, engaged in negotiations to buy the yacht from its owner, broker Marlineer International, Inc., but the deal ultimately fell through. Littell sued in federal court, invoking the court’s admiralty jurisdiction and its supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims. After a bench trial, the court determined that it did not have admiralty jurisdiction but nonetheless adjudicated both the federal admiralty claims and a supplemental state-law claim in favor of Marlineer. Littell appeals, challenging the district court’s conclusions on the substance of his claims. We do not reach the merits of Littell’s appeal, however, because of the lack of jurisdiction. Without admiralty jurisdiction, the court had no authority to adjudicate the merits of the admiralty claims. In addition, absent original admiralty jurisdiction, the district court did not have supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 , and the entire case should have…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.