Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2013)

Fane Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 1, 2012 Decided January 15, 2013
Full case name	Fane Lozman v. The City of Riviera Beach, Florida
Docket no.	11-626
Citations	568 U.S. 115 (more)
Argument	Oral argument
Opinion announcement	Opinion announcement
Case history
Prior	City of Riviera Beach v. That Certain Unnamed Gray, Two-Story Vessel Approximately Fifty-Seven Feet in Length, 649 F.3d 1259 (2011)
Holding
A vessel is something that a reasonable observer would consider designed for transportation on water. Lozman's floating home was not a vessel.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Breyer, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito, Kagan
Dissent	Sotomayor, joined by Kennedy
Laws applied
Rules of Construction Act

Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 568 U.S. 115 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a vessel in admiralty law is something that a reasonable observer would consider designed for water transportation. The case arose from an in rem suit brought under admiralty jurisdiction by the city of Riviera Beach, Florida, against a floating home owned by resident Fane Lozman. Lozman argued that the floating home, which had no means by which to propel itself, was not a vessel under the Rules of Construction Act and thus not subject to admiralty jurisdiction. The Court resolved a circuit split as to what it means for a vessel to be "capable" of transportation by creating the reasonable observer standard, ruling in Lozman's favor.

The case was noted for the amusing factual question presented, which caused Chief Justice John Roberts to describe it as his favorite case of the term, and for the context of the dispute between Lozman and Riviera Beach: The two parties were involved in a number of related legal disputes, and Lozman proceeded pro se for part of the litigation. Lozman and the city returned to the Supreme Court in 2018 regarding Lozman's arrest at a city council meeting; the court held for Lozman that time as well.