§ 3 (“the word ‘vessel’ includes every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water”); cf. also Keys Jet Ski, Inc. v. Kays, 893 F.2d 1225 (11 Cir.1990); Matter of Guglielmo, 897 F.2d 58 (2 Cir.1990). In this regard, the operation of a motorized jet ski, like a small motor boat, sufficiently implicates traditional maritime activities. Foremost, supra, 457 U.S. at 676, 102 S.Ct. at 2659. As plaintiffs' complaint essentially alleges that decedent was killed as a result of “a collision between two vessels on navigable waters ... [it] properly states a claim within the admiralty jurisdiction of [this] federal court”, id. at 677, 102 S.Ct. at 2659; see also Sisson, supra, 497 U.S. at -, 110 S.Ct. at 2897 (<HOLDING>). It is important to note that this conclusion
holding that it is the conduct required to obtain a conviction rather than the consequences resulting from the crime that is relevant holding that an indictment that is substantially in the language of the code is sufficient inform and substance holding that because the activity reported did not constitute any form of criminally illegal activity  mcarns narrow public policy exception is not applicable in this instance holding that navigation is an example rather than a sole instance of conduct that is substantially related to traditional maritime activity holding that standard of review is a matter of procedural rather than substantive law