Originally Posted by Multihullgirl
Thanks Group9. I now see where the laws differ.
In our instance (mooring fields) it would take a pretty good lawyer to argue that navigation is impeded as in the example of the OS/BLX bridge. That is to say, in a historic anchorage whereat navigation was really already impeded, yes? And of course Trinity could afford good lawyers. I've not yet seen anything come out of the Trinity yard which challenges anything near that bridge height
only a couple of gin palaces, ha ha
It appears, ltgoshen, that Group9 has offered your answer. Got lawyer?
My recollection is that at the time, they had some orders for some boats that were going to be taller than 75 feet. Trinity was also in the process of moving their New Orleans operations to Gulfport. But, the big thing, that I remember, was that the Coast Guard joined the lawsuit and agreed the bridge height affected navigable waters.
I used to work for the state attorney general and it was always amusing when government officials would write for an opinion on whether they could do "A" and we would tell them they couldn't. And, then they would go and do it anyway, and then come to us wanting us to represent them when they were sued for doing what we told them they couldn't do.
Amazing, but it happened a lot.