Skip to main content
· 6/4/1997

Concordia Co. v. Panek

Citations

  • 115 F.3d 67
  • 1997 A.M.C. 2357
  • 37 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1079
  • 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 13051
  • 1997 WL 287627

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that a plaintiff who utilizes an “in admiralty” caption and who does not demand a trial by jury [as in the instant case] elects to proceed under the court’s admiralty jurisdiction
  • describing what constitutes an adequate identifying statement for plaintiff to invoke a district court’s admiralty jurisdiction
  • \One important factor in determining whether a claimant has elected to proceed in admiralty is whether he demanded a jury trial.\
  • “One important factor in determining whether a claimant has elected to proceed in admiralty is whether he demanded a jury trial.”
  • \One important factor in determining whether a claimant has elected to proceed in admiralty is whether he demanded a jury trial.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Torruella, Selya, Saris

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.