Career upgrade: Learn practical AI skills for better jobs and higher pay.
Level up
PracticeVideosBlogFlashcardsEspañol
All Practice Exams

200+ Free CA Admiralty Specialist Practice Questions

Pass your California Certified Legal Specialist — Admiralty & Maritime Law exam on the first try — instant access, no signup required.

✓ No registration✓ No credit card✓ No hidden fees✓ Start practicing immediately
Not published Pass Rate
200+ Questions
100% Free
1 / 200
Question 1
Score: 0/0

FRCP Rule 50(a) Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL):

A
B
C
D
to track
Same family resources

Explore More Legal Specialty Certifications

Continue into nearby exams from the same family. Each card keeps practice questions, study guides, flashcards, videos, and articles in one place.

CA Certified Specialist — Appellate Law

Practice Questions

CA Certified Specialist — Bankruptcy Law

Practice Questions

CA Certified Specialist — Criminal Law

Practice Questions

CA Certified Specialist — Estate Planning, Trust & Probate Law

Practice Questions

CA Certified Specialist — Family Law

Practice Questions

CA Certified Specialist — Franchise & Distribution Law

Practice Questions
2026 Statistics

Key Facts: CA Admiralty Specialist Exam

5 years

Minimum CA Bar Practice Required

California Board of Legal Specialization

25%

Admiralty Workload Threshold (3 yrs)

CBLS Admiralty Specialty Standards

45 hours

Required Admiralty CLE (3 yrs)

CBLS Admiralty Specialty Standards

1 day

Written Exam Length

California Board of Legal Specialization

~$1,000

Combined Application + Exam Fees

CBLS fee schedule

100

Free Practice Questions Here

OpenExamPrep question bank

The CA Admiralty Specialist exam is a one-day written test for experienced California attorneys seeking CBLS certification in admiralty and maritime law. It uses the same uniform CBLS format as other specialty exams — a mix of essays, multiple-choice, and performance components — and covers federal admiralty jurisdiction, Jones Act seaman remedies, LHWCA, maritime contracts, marine pollution, and California state-court admiralty practice. Applicants must show 5+ years of active CA practice, at least 25% admiralty workload during the preceding 3 years, defined task experience, 45 hours of recent admiralty CLE, and favorable peer references. An alternative-to-exam pathway is under proposal but the exam is still current.

Sample CA Admiralty Specialist Practice Questions

Try these sample questions to test your CA Admiralty Specialist exam readiness. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 200+ question experience with AI tutoring.

1Which federal statute is the primary source of federal admiralty subject-matter jurisdiction?
A.28 USC §1331
B.28 USC §1332
C.28 USC §1333
D.28 USC §1367
Explanation: 28 USC §1333 grants the federal district courts original jurisdiction over any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction. It also contains the saving-to-suitors clause, which preserves the right of plaintiffs to pursue in personam maritime remedies in state court or on the law side of federal court. §1331 is federal-question, §1332 is diversity, and §1367 is supplemental jurisdiction.
2The saving-to-suitors clause in 28 USC §1333 has which of the following primary effects?
A.It abolishes federal admiralty jurisdiction over in rem claims
B.It preserves common-law in personam remedies that may be pursued in state court or on the law side of federal court
C.It allows plaintiffs to bring in rem claims in state court
D.It eliminates the right to a jury trial in maritime cases
Explanation: The saving-to-suitors clause preserves common-law in personam remedies for maritime claims, allowing plaintiffs to elect a state-court or federal-law-side forum (often to obtain a jury). It does not authorize in rem proceedings in state court — true in rem maritime actions remain exclusively within federal admiralty jurisdiction. Jury rights are preserved at law but not on the admiralty side.
3Which type of maritime claim may ONLY be brought in federal admiralty court?
A.In personam negligence claim against the vessel owner
B.Jones Act claim against the employer
C.In rem action against the vessel itself
D.Wrongful-death claim under state law
Explanation: True in rem actions — where the vessel itself is the defendant and is arrested under Supplemental Admiralty Rule C — may be brought only in federal admiralty court. The saving-to-suitors clause preserves in personam state-court remedies but does not extend to in rem process. Jones Act and many in personam claims can proceed in state court.
4Under Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., what two-part test determines admiralty tort jurisdiction?
A.Vessel ownership and seaman status
B.Location on navigable waters AND substantial connection to traditional maritime activity
C.In rem availability and federal-question presence
D.Diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy
Explanation: Grubart (1995) confirms that admiralty tort jurisdiction requires (1) the tort to occur on navigable waters (location prong) and (2) a substantial connection to traditional maritime activity, which examines both whether the incident has a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce and whether the general activity involved bears a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity. The Foremost Insurance v. Richardson maritime-activity test is incorporated into Grubart's connection prong.
5Which water body is considered 'navigable waters of the United States' for admiralty tort jurisdiction purposes?
A.A private artificial pond used only for recreational paddleboats
B.A river capable of being used as a highway for interstate or international commerce
C.A backyard swimming pool
D.A small irrigation ditch with no commercial use
Explanation: For admiralty tort jurisdiction, 'navigable waters' generally means waters that are presently capable, by themselves or with reasonable improvements, of supporting commercial activity as a highway for interstate or international commerce (The Daniel Ball; The Montello). Purely intrastate, non-commercial waters do not qualify. (Note: 'navigable in fact' tests differ from the broader Commerce Clause/CWA navigable-waters definitions.)
6Which procedural rules govern in rem actions against vessels in federal admiralty practice?
A.Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4-15 only
B.Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims (especially Rules C and E)
C.California Code of Civil Procedure
D.UCC Article 9
Explanation: The Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims, appended to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, govern admiralty in rem and quasi in rem practice. Supplemental Rule C governs in rem actions (vessel arrest), Rule B governs maritime attachment, Rule D governs petitory and possessory actions, and Rule E sets common procedural standards including verified complaints and security requirements.
7Maritime attachment under Supplemental Rule B is available when which condition is satisfied?
A.The defendant is present in the district
B.The defendant cannot be found within the district AND the claim is in personam admiralty
C.The plaintiff posts a $1 million bond
D.The defendant is a U.S. citizen
Explanation: Supplemental Rule B authorizes maritime attachment and garnishment when (1) the plaintiff has a valid prima facie admiralty in personam claim and (2) the defendant cannot be 'found within the district' for service of process. The plaintiff may attach the defendant's property or credits in the district to obtain quasi in rem jurisdiction and security. The plaintiff need not be a U.S. citizen and the bond requirement is procedural rather than a million-dollar threshold.
8Which doctrine, repudiated by Congress, formerly allowed harbor workers to recover unseaworthiness as 'Sieracki seamen' under general maritime law?
A.Robins Dry Dock rule
B.Sieracki seaman doctrine
C.Mitchell unseaworthiness rule
D.Cabotage doctrine
Explanation: Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki (1946) extended the warranty of seaworthiness to longshore workers performing 'work traditionally done by seamen,' creating the 'Sieracki seaman.' The 1972 LHWCA amendments effectively abolished Sieracki recoveries against vessels by replacing unseaworthiness with the §905(b) negligence-only remedy. Mitchell v. Trawler Racer is the modern unseaworthiness case; Robins Dry Dock concerns economic-loss recovery.
9A Jones Act seaman files suit in California Superior Court on the law side, seeking damages for the negligence of his employer. Can the case be removed to federal court?
A.Yes, automatically because it raises a federal claim
B.No, Jones Act cases filed in state court are generally non-removable absent an independent basis
C.Yes, only if the defendant is foreign
D.No, because state courts have exclusive jurisdiction over Jones Act claims
Explanation: Jones Act cases filed in state court are generally non-removable under 46 USC §30104, which incorporates the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) anti-removal provision (28 USC §1445(a)). The saving-to-suitors clause supports the plaintiff's right to a state forum. Removal may be possible only on an independent basis such as fraudulent joinder or where the Jones Act claim is fraudulent.
10Which type of maritime contract is generally NOT subject to admiralty jurisdiction?
A.Charter party
B.Marine insurance policy
C.Contract to build a vessel (shipbuilding contract)
D.Bill of lading for ocean carriage
Explanation: Under longstanding U.S. law (People's Ferry Co. v. Beers, 1857), contracts to build a vessel are NOT maritime contracts because the vessel does not yet exist as a maritime instrumentality. Repair contracts are maritime, charter parties are maritime, marine insurance is maritime, and bills of lading for ocean carriage are maritime. Norfolk Southern Ry. v. Kirby (2004) clarified the modern conceptual approach to maritime contracts.

About the CA Admiralty Specialist Exam

The California Certified Legal Specialist — Admiralty & Maritime Law examination is administered by the California Board of Legal Specialization (CBLS). It tests deep knowledge of federal admiralty jurisdiction (28 USC §1333), the Jones Act (46 USC §30104), the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (33 USC §901+), maritime contracts (COGSA, charter parties, marine insurance), general maritime torts and the Limitation of Liability Act (46 USC §30501+), cargo regimes (Harter Act, Hague-Visby, Hamburg), marine pollution (OPA-90, Clean Water Act), and California state-court admiralty issues (CCP §410.10, Death on the High Seas Act). Candidates must be active California attorneys with 5+ years of practice and substantial admiralty involvement.

Questions

100 scored questions

Time Limit

1 day (approximately 6 hours of written examination)

Passing Score

Set by CBLS each administration (scaled, not publicly disclosed)

Exam Fee

~$750 exam fee + $250 application fee (California Board of Legal Specialization (CBLS), State Bar of California)

CA Admiralty Specialist Exam Content Outline

18%

Admiralty Jurisdiction

28 USC §1333 federal admiralty jurisdiction, saving-to-suitors clause, in rem versus in personam actions, Sieracki/Lynchburg seaman doctrines, traditional maritime activity test (Foremost Insurance v. Richardson, Grubart), and choice-of-law

16%

Jones Act

46 USC §30104 statutory remedy for seamen, Chandris seaman status test, employer negligence, featherweight causation standard, contributory and comparative negligence, maintenance and cure interaction

14%

LHWCA

33 USC §901+ Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, status and situs requirements, §905(b) vessel negligence actions, Section 33 third-party recoveries and employer lien, scheduled benefits

14%

Maritime Contracts

Carriage of goods (COGSA), voyage/time/bareboat charter parties, demurrage and laytime, marine insurance (sue-and-labor clause, particular average, general average York-Antwerp Rules), towage and salvage agreements

12%

Maritime Torts

General maritime law negligence, Mitchell v. Trawler Racer unseaworthiness doctrine, Sieracki seaman, vessel owner's Limitation of Liability Act (46 USC §30501+), concursus procedure

12%

Cargo & Shipping

COGSA Hague Rules adoption, Harter Act for pre-loading/post-discharge, Hague-Visby and Hamburg Rules in international contexts, bills of lading, package limitation, deviation

8%

Marine Pollution & MSAct

Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 USC §2701+), Certificate of Financial Responsibility, response organization requirements, Clean Water Act enforcement, state law preemption

6%

California State-Court Admiralty

CCP §410.10 long-arm jurisdiction, Death on the High Seas Act (46 USC §30301), saving-to-suitors state-court remedies, attachment and bond practice in state court

How to Pass the CA Admiralty Specialist Exam

What You Need to Know

  • Passing score: Set by CBLS each administration (scaled, not publicly disclosed)
  • Exam length: 100 questions
  • Time limit: 1 day (approximately 6 hours of written examination)
  • Exam fee: ~$750 exam fee + $250 application fee

Keys to Passing

  • Complete 500+ practice questions
  • Score 80%+ consistently before scheduling
  • Focus on highest-weighted sections
  • Use our AI tutor for tough concepts

CA Admiralty Specialist Study Tips from Top Performers

1Memorize the saving-to-suitors framework cold: in rem maritime claims belong exclusively in federal admiralty, while in personam claims may be brought in state court or federal court on the law side — but a Jones Act claim filed in state court is generally not removable
2For Jones Act seaman status, walk through both Chandris prongs (vessel-function contribution + substantial connection in duration and nature) and remember the 30% guideline; identify when a worker is a borrowed servant or a member of an identifiable fleet
3Master the LHWCA dual test — status (covered maritime employment) AND situs (navigable waters or adjoining pier/wharf/terminal area customarily used for maritime work) — and know §905(b) for negligence actions against vessels and Section 33 for the employer's lien against third-party recoveries
4For the Limitation of Liability Act, know the 6-month filing deadline, the post-casualty value plus pending freight measure, and the privity-or-knowledge defense; practice the concursus framework and the personal injury supplemental fund under 46 USC §30506
5Distinguish COGSA (tackle-to-tackle international and domestic foreign trade, $500/package limit) from the Harter Act (pre-loading and post-discharge in domestic trade) and from Hague-Visby/Hamburg Rules (international regimes); know when COGSA applies by contract versus statute
6For marine insurance, separate sue-and-labor (insured's duty to mitigate, separate recovery) from particular average (partial losses) and general average (York-Antwerp Rules sacrifice and contribution); apply Wilburn Boat for state-law gap-filling when no entrenched maritime rule applies

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is eligible to sit for the CA Admiralty Specialist exam?

Applicants must be active members of the State Bar of California in good standing for at least 5 years, demonstrate substantial involvement in admiralty and maritime law (typically at least 25% of practice during the 3 years preceding application), satisfy the CBLS task list (such as vessel arrests, Jones Act/LHWCA matters, cargo and charter party disputes, marine insurance), complete 45 hours of approved admiralty education in the 3 years before applying, and provide favorable peer references.

How is the CA Admiralty Specialist exam structured?

CBLS specialty exams use a uniform full-day written format consisting of essay questions, multiple-choice items, and a performance-style component. The Admiralty & Maritime Law exam covers federal admiralty jurisdiction, the Jones Act, LHWCA, maritime contracts and cargo regimes, general maritime torts including the Limitation of Liability Act, marine pollution statutes, and California state-court admiralty issues. The exam is offered in person, typically annually.

What is the saving-to-suitors clause?

The saving-to-suitors clause in 28 USC §1333 preserves common-law remedies for maritime claims by allowing in personam admiralty claims to be brought in state court or on the law side of federal court, while reserving exclusive admiralty (in rem) jurisdiction to the federal courts. A plaintiff may pursue a Jones Act claim in state court, but in rem actions against a vessel may only proceed in federal admiralty.

What is the seaman status test under the Jones Act?

Under Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis (1995), a Jones Act seaman must (1) contribute to the function of a vessel in navigation or accomplish its mission, and (2) have a connection to a vessel (or identifiable fleet) in navigation that is substantial in both duration and nature. The Supreme Court generally considers 30% of work time aboard a vessel as a rule-of-thumb for the duration prong, though courts examine the totality of the circumstances.

How does the Limitation of Liability Act work?

The Limitation of Liability Act of 1851 (now codified at 46 USC §30501+) allows a vessel owner to limit liability to the post-casualty value of the vessel plus pending freight, provided the loss occurred without the owner's privity or knowledge. The owner files a limitation complaint in federal court within 6 months of receiving written notice of a claim, deposits a bond, and the court enjoins all other actions and conducts a concursus to allocate the limitation fund among claimants.

What's the difference between LHWCA and Jones Act remedies?

The Jones Act (46 USC §30104) provides a negligence-based remedy for seamen with a substantial connection to a vessel in navigation. LHWCA (33 USC §901+) is a no-fault workers' compensation statute for shore-based maritime workers (longshore workers, ship repairers, harbor workers) who satisfy both the status test (covered employment) and situs test (navigable waters or adjoining areas customarily used for maritime work). Jones Act seamen are categorically excluded from LHWCA coverage.