maritime law where a state remedy “works material prejudice to the characteristic features of the general maritime law or interferes with the proper harmony and uniformity of that law in its international and interstate relations”); see also St. Hilaire Moye v. Henderson, 496 F.2d 973, 980 (8th Cir.1974); cf. Princess Cruises, Inc. v. General Electric Company, 143 F.3d 828, 832 (4th Cir.1998) (“The uniformity is not to be sacrificed to accommodate state law is a fundamental premise of admiralty jurisdiction.”). Maritime law provides that an alleged tortfeasor may seek contribution, indemnification, or apportionment from one who may be comparatively negligent or a joint tortfeasor. See Cooper Stevedoring Co. v. Fritz Kopke, Inc., 417 U.S. 106, 94 S.Ct. 2174, 40 L.Ed.2d 694 (1974) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Reliable Transfer Co., Inc.,
recognizing the right under federal maritime law to contribution or indemnity from another tortfeasor recognizing right of contribution against joint tortfeasor where release is obtained on his behalf holding that contribution will lie where no statute precludes recovery from the joint tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought recognizing a right to contribution holding original tortfeasor had no right to indemnification because claim properly was for contribution