Paul Abbott v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an admiralty action was permissible in diversity where “it does not affect the interests of others in the world at large, as it would if this were a proceeding in rem to enforce a lien”
• interpreting the savings-to-suitors clause to mean that the common law is \competent\ to adjudicate cases proceeding in personam, where the defendant is a person, but not proceedings in rem
• Federal admiralty jurisdiction is exclusive as to in rem proceedings against vessel, but “saving to suitors” clause renders State courts competent to adjudicate admiralty claims against persons

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).