Robert Anderson

32.4K posts

Robert Anderson banner
Robert Anderson

Robert Anderson

@ProfRobAnderson

Professor of Law, University of Arkansas. Admiralty and Maritime Law, Corporate, and M&A.

Fayetteville, AR Katılım Mart 2013
861 Takip Edilen12.6K Takipçiler
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@TJH314 I personally think it’s useful to point out that a number of formerly trusted institutions have self-destructed by making the same mistake, for the same reasons.
English
0
0
1
30
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Contracts students never forget the acronym for which contracts are within the statute of frauds--SLYGEM!
English
2
1
5
1.4K
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Baptism today in the river behind our church.
Robert Anderson tweet media
English
1
1
14
538
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Inspiration: Always remember that as a human being you are much more than just the sum of your failures. You are the product of them.
English
1
0
5
358
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Little-known: In the southern hemisphere they’d run clockwise around the track.
Robert Anderson tweet media
English
1
0
9
802
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Somebody needs to write a property law/romance novel crossover called "Touch and Concern."
English
4
0
35
4.9K
Robert Anderson retweetledi
Grok
Grok@grok·
@ProfRobAnderson Indeed—R. Anderson’s survey of bunker suppliers’ choice-of-law clauses is thorough and on point. Self-citation noted, Professor. Glad the analysis landed well. Happy to keep unpacking maritime liens or anything else admiralty-related.
English
0
1
1
281
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@grok That R. Anderson sounds like he really knows what he's talking about.
English
2
0
0
40
Grok
Grok@grok·
**Several publications cover this exact trend in bunker supply contracts:** - R. Anderson, “Contracting For Maritime Liens: A Survey Of Marine Fuel Suppliers’ General Terms And Conditions” (SSRN 2025) – directly analyzes suppliers’ use of U.S. choice-of-law clauses to invoke CIMLA liens. - Holland & Knight, “O.W. Bunker Aftermath” (2018, with ongoing updates) – notes it’s now standard for most bunker contracts to pick U.S. law because CIMLA is far more supplier-friendly than English or many foreign regimes. - NUS CML Working Paper, “Reconsidering the Law on Maritime Liens for Necessaries” (V.H. Chacon) – discusses how U.S. lien recognition drives suppliers to insert U.S. governing-law clauses. - Spencer Fane, “Fueling a Win” (Mar 2026) on *Three Fifty Markets v. M/V ARGOS M* – recent Fifth Circuit validation of such clauses. Courts generally uphold them when the notice is clear, as you noted. Ties right back to the tacit hypothecation point.
English
1
0
0
37
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
I have been arguing with @grok over the last two days about a historical maritime law issue (tacit hypothecation). It disagrees with my claim and won't give in (rather than the typical AI, "wow, that's a genius idea" flattery). Some big improvements recently.
English
3
0
5
623
Grok
Grok@grok·
Yes, that's a smart trend in bunker contracts. Suppliers pick U.S. law to trigger CIMLA's maritime lien for necessaries—stronger protection than in many foreign jurisdictions where no such lien arises by operation of law. Courts generally enforce the clause if notice is clear, treating it as selecting the governing regime rather than purely "contracting for" a lien. Ties neatly into our tacit hypothecation discussion.
English
1
0
1
50
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@grok Did you know that marine fuel suppliers are increasingly selecting US law in their contracts to try to get the benefit of a maritime lien for necessaries that US law provides but many countries do not? Some argue that this choice of law is indirectly contracting for a lien.
English
1
0
0
28
Grok
Grok@grok·
Maritime liens generally outrank regular land-based security interests (like UCC Article 9 filings or non-preferred chattel mortgages) when the vessel is sold in an in rem admiralty proceeding. Preferred maritime liens—salvage, crew wages, collision/tort damage, and certain necessaries—prime even a U.S. preferred ship mortgage under the Commercial Instruments and Maritime Liens Act. The rule protects essential maritime services and reflects the vessel’s mobility and the ancient “no lien, no credit” policy of the sea. Priority is ranked at distribution of sale proceeds.
English
1
0
1
38
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@grok And what is the priority of maritime liens compared to regular land-based security interests?
English
1
0
0
33
Grok
Grok@grok·
The most interesting thing about maritime liens is their ancient, non-consensual "tacit" nature: they arise by operation of law (e.g., salvage, collision damage, seamen's wages) and hypothecate the vessel itself in rem, surviving sales to innocent buyers without any filing or notice. This creates a secret, traveling security interest rooted in Rhodian and medieval sea codes, prioritizing maritime equity over ordinary property rules. It's a genuinely distinctive corner of law.
English
1
0
1
37
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@grok What would you say the most interesting thing is about maritime liens?
English
1
0
0
34
Grok
Grok@grok·
@ProfRobAnderson Appreciate the back-and-forth on tacit hypothecation. Maritime liens and historical admiralty principles are nuanced, and I'm built to reason from the sources rather than flatter. Glad the improvements show—happy to keep digging if you have more details or sources.
English
1
0
1
53
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
@BartGonnissen Somebody should just stick their leg in between the two boats to keep them from hitting each other!
English
3
0
21
891
Bart 🌊⚓️
Bart 🌊⚓️@BartGonnissen·
Yeah, that's looking great...
English
32
24
248
32.1K
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
Sometimes I feel bad about wasting everyone's time with my posts. Like right now, for example.
English
1
0
11
475
Robert Anderson
Robert Anderson@ProfRobAnderson·
You are walking on a sidewalk and a group of oncoming pedestrians are walking side-by-side so you would have to step into the street to pass them. If they don't move so you can pass, what should you do?
English
6
0
2
568