Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Foremost Insurance Co. Et Al. v. Richardson Et Al.

• 1981 • 457 U.S. 668 • Burger Court
The U.S. Supreme Court case Foremost Insurance Co. et al. v. Richardson et al., 1981, revolved around a boating accident that resulted in the death of two people and injury to another person on Lake Okeechobee, Florida. The main issue was whether federal maritime law or state law should apply since the lake is non-navigable for interstate commerce purposes but navigable in fact (i.e., it can be used for boating). The court ruled that federal admiralty jurisdiction extends to accidents on bodies...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1981
Docket: 80-2134
457 U.S. 668
102 S. Ct. 2654
73 L. Ed. 2d 300
1982 U.S. LEXIS 40
Argued: Jan 12, 1982

Foremost Insurance Co. Et Al. v. Richardson Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court case Foremost Insurance Co. et al. v. Richardson et al., 1981, revolved around a boating accident that resulted in the death of two people and injury to another person on Lake Okeechobee, Florida. The main issue was whether federal maritime law or state law should apply since the lake is non-navigable for interstate commerce purposes but navigable in fact (i.e., it can be used for boating). The court ruled that federal admiralty jurisdiction extends to accidents on bodies of water like Lake Okeechobee which are navigable in fact even if they are not involved with interstate commerce, thus applying federal maritime law instead of state tort law to this case.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Foremost Insurance Co. et al. v. Richardson et al., Justice William Rehnquist disagreed with the majority's decision to extend admiralty jurisdiction to accidents involving pleasure boats on navigable waters, arguing that it was a departure from traditional principles of maritime law and an overreach by federal courts into state matters. He contended that historically, admiralty jurisdiction has been limited to commercial activities and public navigation concerns rather than private recreational boating incidents which have traditionally been handled under state law. He also expressed concern about the potential implications of this expansion on other areas such as aviation or land transportation where similar arguments could be made for extending federal jurisdiction based on interstate commerce or national interest considerations.

Opinion written by Justice TMarshall
Decided: Jun 23, 1982
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms