And now here's the Class Action Lawsuit

[texsun49]

They did? What about the water on the ground you see if some pictures, that doesn't seem safe at all. Not blame crew on the ship, heard they were great maybe land base can do a little more. I know when Heat win a ring again this year send Wade, Bosh, and Lebron on the worst carnival ship and hope it breaks down so they learn how it's like

 

Safe I guess is a relative term....but no one was killed, and no one seriously injured that we know of, so in those terms yes they were kept safe. Pictures of water? Do you know that is was not cleaned up, or that ares closed off...how long was the water there before picture was taken, how long was it there after picture taken?

[texsun49]

Yes I agree.

 

With possible exception of anyone who suffered actual physical injury onboard, but so far I have heard no serious injuries reported.

 

I know people during normal cruises from time to time have accidents... slips, fall down stairs etc.... I am just curious if anyone knows if in those cases there have been any successful suits filed against a cruise line, since I am assuming that those types of incidents happen on all lines.

[dwjoe]

Interesting question about the compensation.

 

I don't know the details, but I do know that the passengers were not asked to sign anything in order to receive the compensation offered by Carnival. so it's not a "settlement" of their claims. Accepting a "settlement" and signing a release would bar their participation in the class action suit.

 

One media outlet reported that the first person to file suit "refused" Carnival's compensation offer. I don't know if that means she didn't actually receive the compensation, or if that's posturing because she thinks she's entitled to more.

 

Another question I'd consider -- if these suits are successful, can Carnival argue that the compensation paid out to the passengers is an offset to any damage award?

Yes, interesting question.

 

I am sceptical that accepting CCL's compensation bars future lawsuits unless they signed a release.

 

However, I do think that making the offer shows good faith by CCL and that may help them in a lawsuit.

[RazorbackBelle08]

I know people during normal cruises from time to time have accidents... slips, fall down stairs etc.... I am just curious if anyone knows if in those cases there have been any successful suits filed against a cruise line, since I am assuming that those types of incidents happen on all lines.

 

In the contract they sign it clearly states that Carnival isn't liable for anything beyond *intentionally* caused physical injury, so I bet there haven't been, but there have probably been personal injury claims that have settled with Carnival's insurance, out of court. This is just my opinion though. As far as other cruise lines I haven't read their contracts so I'm not sure, but I would imagine the fine print is similar.

[dwjoe]

I know people during normal cruises from time to time have accidents... slips, fall down stairs etc.... I am just curious if anyone knows if in those cases there have been any successful suits filed against a cruise line, since I am assuming that those types of incidents happen on all lines.

I don't know about general slip & fall type cases on cruise ships.

 

However, on Triumph there is another factor: if they can show that the injury was caused by degraded conditions onboard related to the mechanical failure which in principle was under CCL's control, they should have an easier time proving their case.

[songbird1329]

I know people during normal cruises from time to time have accidents... slips, fall down stairs etc.... I am just curious if anyone knows if in those cases there have been any successful suits filed against a cruise line, since I am assuming that those types of incidents happen on all lines.

 

Yes some of those suits succeed.

 

Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2

[songbird1329]

I don't know about general slip & fall type cases on cruise ships.

 

However, on Triumph there is another factor: if they can show that the injury was caused by degraded conditions onboard related to the mechanical failure which in principle was under CCL's control, they should have an easier time proving their case.

 

Not easy at all. You need numerous experts, including someone familiar with engineering, electrical systems, fire supression methods, toxicologists . . .expert depositions alone will take months, assuming the case gets that far.

 

Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2

[texsun49]

I don't know about general slip & fall type cases on cruise ships.

 

However, on Triumph there is another factor: if they can show that the injury was caused by degraded conditions onboard related to the mechanical failure which in principle was under CCL's control, they should have an easier time proving their case.

 

This would still require them to show neglegence on CCL part for the mechanical failure which caused the degraded condition. But then I suppose it could be taken to the extreme and ultimately say it was a part failure and then it goes all the way to the mfg... lot of money for lawyers either way it goes.

[airmj2123]

I know people during normal cruises from time to time have accidents... slips, fall down stairs etc.... I am just curious if anyone knows if in those cases there have been any successful suits filed against a cruise line, since I am assuming that those types of incidents happen on all lines.

 

I know someone who fell and messed up their back pretty bad because of a cord from a vacuum (the guy pulled the cord and it left the ground and she tripped)... It was settled prior to any court case... Same with my friend who sliced his finger open playing ping pong (all medical expenses covered, and some OBC)

[MEOWSMURPHY]

I notice it's the same attorney who's been on every possible News Talk Show he could be on over the past week.

 

Apart from the shipboard conditions caused by the cruise ship fire, Lipcon also points out that Carnival’s decision to tow the Triumph to Mobile, instead of the closer port of Progreso, Mexico, caused passengers to endure more time onboard the disabled vessel than was necessary, prolonging their exposure to disease, accidents and trauma.

 

If the basis of his claim for the lawsuit is that Carnival should have towed the ship to Progresso because it would have taken less time, then I would like to see all the people who are experts in ocean currents, sea towing and the like tear him to shreds in court.

 

I don't have disdain for all attorneys but this guy is an ambulance chaser at his finest.

 

Well said..to say nothing of the passengers who were traveling on birth certificates and would have needed emergency visas to reenter the USA...

[bmckim]

It's federal court. You need access to PACER.

 

Let me get a few things done this AM, then I will pull it from PACER in a few

[songbird1329]

Let me get a few things done this AM, then I will pull it from PACER in a few

 

 

thanks. I have no access, and I would love to see how he pleads around the contract.

[bmckim]

Here it is:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbFQdZXQ3TgSHdBaFNibkZHdDA/edit?usp=sharing

 

This is my quick read of the Class Action section and what he uses to get around it:

 

The law referenced doesn't allow you to waive personal injury and negligence in a contract in maritime law -- Doesn't say anything about Class Action

 

The case referenced, the judge booted the class and then it was reinstated due to an issue with the certification of the class, and notice thereof, not a bar on class action as his here.

 

I don't think he is going to be able to get over the California case and the Supreme Court case mentioned by Songbird and talked about on the other thread. Should be interesting.

[Jimnbigd]

What was the final offer from Carnival for the Splendor when it had a similar problem? Was there a successful class action law suit?

[songbird1329]

Here it is:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbFQdZXQ3TgSHdBaFNibkZHdDA/edit?usp=sharing

 

This is my quick read of the Class Action section and what he uses to get around it:

 

The law referenced doesn't allow you to waive personal injury and negligence in a contract in maritime law -- Doesn't say anything about Class Action

 

The case referenced, the judge booted the class and then it was reinstated due to an issue with the certification of the class, and notice thereof, not a bar on class action as his here.

 

I don't think he is going to be able to get over the California case and the Supreme Court case mentioned by Songbird and talked about on the other thread. Should be interesting.

 

 

Took a quick glance, he's alleging the contract is void as an attempt to limit tort liability, and/or because of Carnival's intentional conduct. I'll read it in depth later,

[songbird1329]

OK, here's what's alleged:

 

1. Carnival's conduct in sending out the ship with faulty propulsion systems was intentional, grossly negligent and negligent.

 

2. Carnival's conduct in the aftermath of the fire, including it's greedy choice to go to Mobile instead of Mexico (thus prolonging the agony) was intentional, reckless and grossly negligent.

 

3. The two causes of action are intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress. the plaintiffs are alleged to have sustained emotional distress which has resulted in physical symptoms such as nausea, headaches, insomnia, etc.

 

4. There are no allegations of physical injury other than the vague symptoms alleged to arise from the emotional distress.

 

My opinion is that this suit does not have legs unless he can win on the argument that the contract is invalid.

[airmj2123]

OK, here's what's alleged:

 

1. Carnival's conduct in sending out the ship with faulty propulsion systems was intentional, grossly negligent and negligent.

 

2. Carnival's conduct in the aftermath of the fire, including it's greedy choice to go to Mobile instead of Mexico (thus prolonging the agony) was intentional, reckless and grossly negligent.

 

3. The two causes of action are intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress. the plaintiffs are alleged to have sustained emotional distress which has resulted in physical symptoms such as nausea, headaches, insomnia, etc.

 

4. There are no allegations of physical injury other than the vague symptoms alleged to arise from the emotional distress.

 

My opinion is that this suit does not have legs unless he can win on the argument that the contract is invalid.

 

Is this case also maritime law? (does that make a difference?)

[Cyn7]

Here it is:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzbFQdZXQ3TgSHdBaFNibkZHdDA/edit?usp=sharing

 

This is my quick read of the Class Action section and what he uses to get around it:

 

The law referenced doesn't allow you to waive personal injury and negligence in a contract in maritime law -- Doesn't say anything about Class Action

 

The case referenced, the judge booted the class and then it was reinstated due to an issue with the certification of the class, and notice thereof, not a bar on class action as his here.

 

I don't think he is going to be able to get over the California case and the Supreme Court case mentioned by Songbird and talked about on the other thread. Should be interesting.

 

 

Thanks for posting.

 

How do you think the USCG statement about the "fuel leak" causing the fire? From the way it was reported, they didn't link the leak to the previous issue with propulsion. IF the final reports from the USCG and NTSB come back that the two issues are not related, how will that effect this lawsuit?

[Ilovehunny]

I now have had one first hand account from a couple that where on the Triumph, and second hand from my wife who had a co-worker on Triumph that returned to work yesterday. Both accounts confirmed what we had heard about....such as the awful smell and lines for food. But they said there was plenty to eat, and getting water was not a problem. Neither were interested in suing, and said as unpleasant as it was, they felt all that could be done under the circumstances was done. Both accounts ended with they felt the compensation was more than fair and are already planning next cruise.

 

Since none of us know the circumstances of what caused the fire, I suppose a suit will possibly answer some questions... my opinion is unless find that CCL knew there was a likelyhood of a fire and continued to run the ship, or CCL is neglegent in their maintanence practices there really is no case.

 

We are of the same opinion as those you have already heard from. There were long lines for food to be sure, and the food may not have been to our particular tastes or liking, but it was plentiful. Neither was water an issue. The smell was indeed pretty bad, but I can't imagine any smell would cause undue hardship or stress.

 

As a whole, I would consider the experience to be uncomfortable and inconvenient. Saying it was "Hell" or describing it as "horror" is a serious dramatization, but there were certainly those types of people aboard who I know are impossible to avoid in a group this size.

 

I'm happy to see that calmer heads are prevailing and that folks like us seem to be the majority.

[bmckim]

Thanks for posting.

 

How do you think the USCG statement about the "fuel leak" causing the fire? From the way it was reported, they didn't link the leak to the previous issue with propulsion. IF the final reports from the USCG and NTSB come back that the two issues are not related, how will that effect this lawsuit?

 

I think that if the reports come back that they are not related, I think as I believe songbird said you are going to have a tough time to either 1. Prove it was intentional (needed for some of the allegations) or 2. That it was grossly negligent or reckless. I think it is a high bar.

 

Now, the attorney did plead that if the class isn't certified that the case go along individually. I am not sure if you can plead that and have it stand in court. I don't do Class Action work, so I just don't know. I think you will see Carnival dismiss many of these on technicalities or on the pleadings. I anticipate many 12(b)(6) motions being granted. And settle some of the legitimate claims. I would be very surprised if any of these made it to a jury.

[Cyn7]

I think that if the reports come back that they are not related, I think as I believe songbird said you are going to have a tough time to either 1. Prove it was intentional (needed for some of the allegations) or 2. That it was grossly negligent or reckless. I think it is a high bar.

 

Now, the attorney did plead that if the class isn't certified that the case go along individually. I am not sure if you can plead that and have it stand in court. I don't do Class Action work, so I just don't know. I think you will see Carnival dismiss many of these on technicalities or on the pleadings. I anticipate many 12(b)(6) motions being granted. And settle some of the legitimate claims. I would be very surprised if any of these made it to a jury.

 

Thanks. I guess now it will be a wait and see what happens.

[The4Cruisers]

This is one time that I WISH I would be called to serve on a jury! Lawsuit lotteries have got to stop!!! :mad:

[songbird1329]

My experience is that if the class isn't certified the lead plaintiffs can still pursue their individual claim without re filing the suit.

 

It becomes more difficult to pursue a claim if all of the investigating agencies exonerate Carnival. You'd have to find expert witnesses willing to dispute those findings and who can support their contentions with scientific evidence.

 

 

We are months away from any final report and I am by no means an expert, but if the final reports look anything like the soundbites we've heard, it becomes a very difficult case for plaintiffs.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[sjn911]

Sorry, I didnt carify... he said it was the carpet in the hall leading to his cabin...and he said they speculated that people continuing to use the toilets once asked not to was a problem.

 

Yes this is how i see it and on a ship in these conditions I find blaming people for where it was coming from and insinuation their fault highly subjective and unfair..a reflection of not having been there; or walking a hallway of a mess.

 

It was not Shawshank Redemption escaping through a sewer or Schindler's list hiding in a latrine for safety...but raw or just wet No 1 sewage on carpet and if doors had outside hall vents..wow. I hope the steward would help me get a mattress to somewhere else on ship..where there was always personnel watching for the inside cabin slumber party.

 

 

I want a return of those 50's rubbers that went over your shoes and were so light to carey in your purse..if lucky..your gramdma gave you a pair of hers..fond memory..and a handy item.

[songbird1329]

Is this case also maritime law? (does that make a difference?)

 

 

He did invoke maritime jurisdiction as well as diversity jurisdiction, but I don't know if that would affect the case.