Gustavo A. Martinez Tristani (Partner-Miami, FL) authored the article “Are We Back to the Pre-Wilburn Boat Era and the Almost Uniform Application of General Maritime Law in the Marine Insurance Business? The Supreme Court Has Made It Clear That Wilburn Boat Should Be Limited to Inherently Local Disputes,” published on November 17, 2025, in the fourth quarter edition of Benedict’s Maritime Bulletin. Gustavo discusses the effect the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Great Lakes Insurance v. Raiders Retreat Realty has had over its prior decision in Wilburn Boat Co. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. regarding the role of state law in connection with marine insurance policies. Gustavo explains that, in its recent ruling, the Supreme Court clarified the law concerning the proper method of interpreting marine insurance policies. First, except in inherently local disputes, courts interpreting marine insurance policies must determine whether an entrenched maritime rule applies. If there is an entrenched rule, it should be applied. If there is no entrenched rule, a court applying maritime law should create the rule. “It is submitted that if there is a conflict between apparent entrenched rules, the court should pick the most entrenched,” Gustavo notes, considering factors such as the needs to: (1) promote consistency and predictability in maritime commerce; (2) promote a uniform system of maritime law in navigation and commerce; (3) and maintain the United States’ diplomatic relations. “If, after considering those factors, the court concludes that state interests prevail,” Gustavo contends, “the court can then decline to create a new rule and apply state law.”