California and State Lands Comm'n v. Deep Sea Research, Inc. 118 S.Ct. 1464 (1998)

Tammy L. Shaw, 2L
 
 
 

On April 22, 1998, The Supreme Court reviewed the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Deep Sea Research vs. Brother Jonathan. In dispute, is the State of California's rights to the shipwreck, the Brother Jonathan found off its coast in 1993.⁽¹⁾

As reported in Water Log, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling in favor of the salvage company that located the wreck.⁽²⁾

Deep Sea Research, Inc. was granted the exclusive salvage rights to the 133 year old shipwreck, despite California's assertion of ownership of the wreck.

Ownership of the Brother Jonathan turns upon whether the shipwreck can be defined as "abandoned" under the requirements of the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987 (ASA).⁽³⁾

The Supreme Court remanded this issue to the District Court with a clarification of the meaning of the term "abandoned". The Court held that "abandoned" under the ASA has the same meaning as under admiralty law. In admiralty law, a shipwreck is abandoned if the title has been affirmatively renounced or when an inference of abandonment can be made from the circumstances.⁽⁴⁾

The Court declined to address the question of whether California's historic preservation statute is pre-empted by the ASA. The California statute operates to transfer title of shipwrecks, that do not fall under the ASA, to the state. The Court found that the District Court's decision on remand might negate the need to address the issue of pre-emption.⁽⁵⁾

In rem admiralty cases have been retained under federal jurisdiction since the first Judiciary Act in 1789. California contends, however, that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal's adjudication of this case is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. While it is undisputed that the Eleventh Amendment bars federal jurisdiction over general title disputes relating to state property interests, the Court held that in rem admiralty cases do not necessarily fall under this immunity and that for this immunity to apply, the state must have a "colorable claim" to the res.⁽⁶⁾

Although, the Eleventh Amendment has been used to constrain federal jurisdiction, the holding in this case has established that a state must have a "colorable claim" of ownership to invoke such immunity.

For Mississippi, Alabama and other states interested in the outcome of this case, the Court has effectively limited the Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity argument, by raising the standard for disputed ownership. The lower court, in this case, had already raised the standard of proof required by holding that a state must prove ownership by a preponderance of the evidence, rather than the "mere assertion of ownership" that had been used in other jurisdictions. While this decision resolves the Eleventh Amendment argument of sovereign immunity, it gives no indication just what a state must do to assert a colorable claim of ownership, nor does the holding resolve the question of federal pre-emption of the many state statutes enacted to aid in shipwreck management.

The holding in Deep Sea Research vs. Brother Jonathan could leave those shipwrecks which do not meet the ASA requirements at the mercy of federal adjudication. While the validity of state statutes enacted to deal with this question is an issue left to later resolution.
 

Endnotes
 

1. California and State Lands Comm'n v. Deep Sea Research, Inc. 118 S.Ct. 1464 (1998).

2. Shipwreck Management in Mississippi and Alabama 17.3 WATER LOG 13 (1997).

3. 43 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2106 (1997).

4. California and State Lands Comm'n v. Deep Sea Research, Inc. 118 S.Ct. 1464, 1466 (1998).

5. Id. at 1473

6. Id. at 1471

1.

^1.

2.

^2.2

3.

^3.3

4.

^4.4

5.

^5.5

6.

^6.6

University of Mississippi