"they assume you know not your jurisdiction." Well, that is all codified. You can look up what the court has jurisdiction over. So that isn't true. And if you don't know how to do it, you can have an attorney look it up. You know, someone trained in the law. This is just a non-starter.
Do you imagine that the attorneys, who want to win their clients' cases, are not bringing motions based upon this? Because there are no statutes I am aware of that give "admiralty courts" jursidiction over regular non-admiralty tort and contract cases. It may be that District Courts can assert admiralty jurisdiction over admiralty law cases, but that wouldn't result in them asserting admiralty jurisdiction over regular civil or criminal cases.
And who gives a rats ass whether the flag has fringe on it. Dumbasses.
Do you fantasize that lawyers and judges when they get out of earshot say "okay, here's the deal, nobody mention admiralty court, and the tooth fairy will give us all a new Porsche"? Is that it? Or is it only the judges. Because I know some judges, and I've never had them apply "admiralty law" to any of my cases, or suggest that it should be applied, and frankly, most have no idea what it is.
Really, I'd like to know what your "logic" is - more for amusement than knowledge - because this just flat makes no sense.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: