kbmeow Posted March 31, 2012 #76 Share Posted March 31, 2012 http://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txsdce/3:2012cv00099/964126/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacruizer Posted March 31, 2012 #77 Share Posted March 31, 2012 This is bizarre on so many levels. If a judge really handed down this order late on a friday afternoon, why wouldn't carnival just post a bond for the amount needed? You know that if there was a haearing this afternoon, carnival's legal team was in attendance and aware of the law if this was possible. Another thought...... they managed to get before a judge the day they refiled the suit? Not much moves that fast in the legal world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sailaway anyday Posted March 31, 2012 #78 Share Posted March 31, 2012 if this is true carnival should port the ship and the majic in miami. and drop texas as a port. it is crazy to think anyone could hold a ship based on a lawsuit. it makes no sense. if they sue the insurace company should be involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
susieokla Posted March 31, 2012 #79 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Why would they choose the Triumph out of all of the Carnival Ships? I sure hope they get this straightened out before April 14th!! :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joytx1 Posted March 31, 2012 #80 Share Posted March 31, 2012 This is terrible news for the folks going out tomorrow. I hope it is resolved quickly and they still get to cruise. I'm booked May 3rd, lets keep our fingers crossed that it gets resolved. The thing that puzzles me....why Galveston? Many more ships in and out of Fla. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego7191 Posted March 31, 2012 #81 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Youre on the Northern District, but this was Southern. Could that be why? Nope, sorry. I did a search for all cases in the U.S. that have that case number (different districts) and clicked on the TX one. This image shows what I see before I select a specific case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joytx1 Posted March 31, 2012 #82 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Just got this information from another message board....why it is Galveston...The Triumph is in the Southern District of Texas, where the lawsuit was filed. that's the only nexus between the Concordia and the Triumph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent_Schultz Posted March 31, 2012 #83 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Carnival Cruise Line has a herd of attorney's on staff - most in Miami. They primarily try to settle lawsuits. IF something goes to court, they bring in additional, really high dollar lawyers. The suit lists Carnival plc - isn't that the British part of Carnival Corp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayhold Posted March 31, 2012 #84 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Carnival Cruise Line has a herd of attorney's on staff - most in Miami. They primarily try to settle lawsuits. IF something goes to court, they bring in additional, really high dollar lawyers. The suit lists Carnival plc - isn't that the British part of Carnival Corp? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc#Carnival_plc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent_Schultz Posted March 31, 2012 #85 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Just got this information from another message board....why it is Galveston...The Triumph is in the Southern District of Texas, where the lawsuit was filed. that's the only nexus between the Concordia and the Triumph. or perhaps one of the judges is related to the plaintiff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbmeow Posted March 31, 2012 #86 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Stumpf v. Carnival plc et al Share | Case Number: 3:2012cv00099 Filed: March 30, 2012 Court: Texas Southern District Court Office: Galveston Office Presiding Judge: Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt Referring Judge: Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner Nature of Suit: Torts - Injury - Other Personal Injury Cause: 28:1333 Admiralty Jury Demanded By: None Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayhold Posted March 31, 2012 #87 Share Posted March 31, 2012 this is making my head hurt, haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego7191 Posted March 31, 2012 #88 Share Posted March 31, 2012 The only thing that is really disturbing to me, besides the obvious of people not getting to sail this weekend, is the second link to the Justia docket that was posted (this one http://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txsdce/3:2012cv00099/964126/) and it shows today as the filing date. If something was filed today, it would not show in a Pacer search until the clerks get it uploaded and updated, which would be Monday or Tuesday. An emergency motion could have been filed with the complaint and put in front of the judge immediately. I just cannot imagine a judge that would sign an order allowing the seizure of a ship, especially after the previous complaint and case was dismissed, unless he (the judge) is looking for some publicity. This is really just weird all the way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruisingteachers4 Posted March 31, 2012 #89 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Our family is sailing on the Triumph on April 9th. I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but this news is making me very nervous!:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArielsGrotto Posted March 31, 2012 #90 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Hey KayholdI checked that case number and it doesn't have anything to do with Carnival. In the picture below, the case number is just below the court information in the top center of the page. The file date reads 1/11/12 but the Concordia disaster happened on 1/13/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego7191 Posted March 31, 2012 #91 Share Posted March 31, 2012 well, it is true - there was an order and warrant issued today. But I'm not completely certain of the language in the order and warrant. The warrant states that paperwork is to be served and the order does state that the vessel can move from berth to berth.....this is getting more and more disheartening. I hope people cruising this weekend don't have issues. Certainly CCL has attorneys/beards in route to Galveston to meet the marshall in the morning when they serve the paperwork..... Can I upload PDF docs here? ETA if I can't upload PDFs I can make JPGs but that will take a little bit of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent_Schultz Posted March 31, 2012 #92 Share Posted March 31, 2012 The only thing that is really disturbing to me, besides the obvious of people not getting to sail this weekend, is the second link to the Justia docket that was posted (this one http://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txsdce/3:2012cv00099/964126/) and it shows today as the filing date. If something was filed today, it would not show in a Pacer search until the clerks get it uploaded and updated, which would be Monday or Tuesday. An emergency motion could have been filed with the complaint and put in front of the judge immediately. I just cannot imagine a judge that would sign an order allowing the seizure of a ship, especially after the previous complaint and case was dismissed, unless he (the judge) is looking for some publicity. This is really just weird all the way around. Oh, I bet people sail or the judge will be drawn and quartered. There is no justification for ordering the vessel seized - Carnival Corp certainly has the resources to pay cash for any judgement in this case. There is no class action status, and even if there was, Carnival could pay cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferfoodle Posted March 31, 2012 #93 Share Posted March 31, 2012 well, it is true - there was an order and warrant issued today. Can I upload PDF docs here? Is there a bond amount in place? Or just the arrest order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratt Posted March 31, 2012 #94 Share Posted March 31, 2012 I know there have been other lawsuits filed by attorneys in other states against Carnival so maybe this is an attorney that decided to take a shot at filing a suit in Texas to see what happens. There are many lawsuits filed every day and many of them have no merit and are dismissed. If the reason for "arresting" the ship is to guarantee payment if they win the suit, I would think it would be a non issue since Carnival is going no where and from a financial stand point they are healthy, even with the lost of the Concordia and it's income. Do we even know if the German tourist that died was actually on the Concordia and indeed did die? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spleenstomper Posted March 31, 2012 #95 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Isn't there something like CCL could post a bond or something in exchange (instead of) for the ship's seizure? Like, this gets their attention and then CCL has to put some money in escrow or something in case the plaintiffs win... (I see ferfoodle mentioned a bond as well... Cross posted) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigman01 Posted March 31, 2012 #96 Share Posted March 31, 2012 This is all hard to believe, but it does appear to be legit. I wonder if the lawyers for the plaintiff did some research, and felt they had a better chance of winning if the lawsuit was filed in Texas? I've always been under the impression that any lawsuits filed against Carnival had to be filed in the state of Florida, but I could be wrong. I wonder how long this will go before a judge dismisses it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent_Schultz Posted March 31, 2012 #97 Share Posted March 31, 2012 this is making my head hurt, haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent_Schultz Posted March 31, 2012 #98 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Isn't there something like CCL could post a bond or something in exchange (instead of) for the ship's seizure? Like, thus gets their attention and then CCL has to put some money in escrow or something in case the plaintiffs win... (I see ferfoodle mentioned a bond as well... Cross posted) me thinks so This is all hard to believe, but it does appear to be legit. I wonder if the lawyers for the plaintiff did some research, and felt they had a better chance of winning if the lawsuit was filed in Texas? I've always been under the impression that any lawsuits filed against Carnival had to be filed in the state of Florida, but I could be wrong. I wonder how long this will go before a judge dismisses it? That is in the Carnival Cruise Line contract of carriage. I'm too lazy to look up Costa's. I'm thinking Carnival Corp doesn't state that, much less Carnival plc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sail2sea Posted March 31, 2012 #99 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Early April fool's? Very weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego7191 Posted March 31, 2012 #100 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Warrant. Order coming soon...hang on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.