Whether a federal court can have exclusive admiralty jurisdiction over a claim when a non-admiralty state court would have concurrent jurisdiction over the same claim

This wrongful -death case, arising out of the tragic Boeing 737 MAX crash into the Java Sea, raises a fundamental question of admiralty jurisdiction. The estate and family of Andrea Manfredi, who died in the crash, brought in personam wrongful -death claims against Boeing and others under the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA), 46 U.S.C. §§ 30301– 30308. These claims can be heard in admiralty, but they also satisfy the requirements for diversity and multiparty, multiforum jurisdiction . “If a claim for relief is within the admiralty or maritime jurisdiction and also within the court’s subject -matter jurisdiction on some other ground, the pleading may ”—but need not—“designate the claim as an admiralty or maritime claim.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 (h). The Manfredis did not so designate their claims. The Seventh Circuit nevertheless held that these DOHSA claims are subject to exclusive admiralty jurisdiction in federal court , meaning no jury -trial right applies. The court so held despite recognizing that the same claims could be heard in state court, where they “are typically tried by juries.” The question presented is: Whether a federal court can have exclusive admiralty jurisdiction over a claim when a non -admiralty state court would have concurrent jurisdiction over the same claim .