A Miami Federal Judge ruled Norwegian Cruise Line owed as a matter of law the duty to warn passengers of the risk of being raped and/or sexually assaulted aboard their cruise ships when such criminal acts are foreseeable. In this case a female passenger from Texas alleged she was over served alcohol during and after a cruise organized drinking event. Court documents reveal she left the bar to utilize a public ladies restroom near the ship’s cafe. The assault victim claims that while in the restroom stall, a man entered, spun her around and raped her.
A part of the allure of cruising is the excursions offered at the various ports of call. However, most passengers do not know the safety standards at these ports of call are a far cry from what they are used to in the United States. Decreased safety standards, unfortunately, result in several accidents to vacationers each year. Maritime law recognizes this problem. It requires cruise lines to warn of known dangers in places where their passengers are invited or expected to visit. It also requires cruise lines to properly vet the tour operators and excursions offered aboard their cruise ships. This law is designed to arm passengers with knowledge in order for them to make informed decisions on their safety while in foreign ports. Often times when a passenger sues for an injury occurring at a port of call, the cruise lines ask the court to dismiss the claim. These attempts to dismiss are met with varying success. The cruise injury attorneys of Brais law recently was required to address such a challenge by a cruise line.
The issue of whether arbitration provisions pertaining to cruise line seaman personal injury claims has been a hotly litigated issue over the past seven years. Nearly every major line today inserts arbitration provisions into their seafarer’s contracts or collective barging agreements. Along with arbitration provisions, the lines include foreign choice of law provisions. The purpose for these provisions is to limit personal injury liability exposure. These provisions take personal injury claims away from juries and place it in the hands of arbitrators (generally lawyers) and apply the less liberal foreign laws than the Jones Act, Penalty Wage Act and United States general maritime law. Since the 2005 landmark decision of Bautista v. Star Cruises, courts have overwhelming enforced such arbitration provisions. Despite wide enforcement of these arbitration provisions, Courts have made some exceptions. The recent case of Cappello v. Carnival Corp. handled by the maritime attorneys of Brais law is one example where a court made such an exception.
The maritime lawyers of Brais Law were successful in defeating a tug and barge company’s attempt to dismiss an injured seaman’s claim for punitive damages and attorney’s fees for the willful delay of providing medical care. Maritime law requires a shipowner to provide a seaman injured within the course and scope of employment medical care until a qualified doctor declares the seaman at a point where medical care can no longer improve the condition. The Supreme Court recently in the case of Atlantic Sounding Co. Inc. v. Townsend found a shipowner can be liable for punitive damages if it willfully, arbitrarily or capriciously denies or delays in providing medical care to an injured seaman. Brais Law argued its client’s case fell inside the perimeters of Townsend thereby allowing the pursuit of punitive damages as well as attorney’s fees.
Law enforcement from Sarasota, Florida responded to a Jet Ski accident on Sunday, June 17, 2012 wherein a man’s arm was nearly severed. According to a Sarasota Fire Rescue spokesperson, two men were riding the personal watercraft in Big Pass between Lido Key and Siesta Key. When the men attempted to jump a wake of a passing boat, the rider in the back fell off and was run over by a 26 foot cabin cruiser. The injured man was medevaced to Tampa General Hospital to have surgery to re-attach his arm.
