Hener v. United States

525 F. Supp. 350, 1982 AMC 847 (1981)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Hener v. United States

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
525 F. Supp. 350, 1982 AMC 847 (1981)

Facts

The barge Harold was transporting silver bullion off of Staten Island in 1903 when it pitched violently in a storm and lost most of its cargo overboard. Most of the silver was soon recovered through a dredging and diving operation. Approximately 15 percent of the silver remained unrecovered, however, and by the 1980s this lost silver was purported to be worth between $10 and $20 million. Commercial and amateur diving groups were interested in attempting to salvage the silver. Three groups began to dispute the right to dive in the area where they believed the silver to be located. The Hener group (plaintiff) was made up of amateur divers who had no commercial recovery experience. Ocean Salvage, Inc. (the Ocean group) (plaintiff) was made up of commercial divers and investors, as was the third group, American Divers, Inc. (the American group) (defendant). Both the Ocean group and the American group took tangible steps toward recovering the lost cargo, including identifying specific locations of interest, engaging in preliminary dives, obtaining necessary equipment, and bringing that equipment to the location. Neither party had actually located or recovered any silver, however. The Hener group did not engage in this level of exploration or preparation but claimed to have information about the location of the silver and the ability to begin diving for it. During these disputes, the United States Coast Guard established a safety zone in the area that prevented anyone from continuing with recovery efforts. The Hener group brought a suit to enjoin the Coast Guard from enforcing the safety zone, and the Ocean group joined the suit as an intervenor. The American group intervened in the suit as a defendant. The Coast Guard disclaimed any interest in who should be allowed to dive but asked the court to determine which party had the right to attempt salvage in the area.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Sofaer, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership