Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog

When a passenger sustains an injury while on a cruise ship or while on a shore excursion purchased through the cruise line, a maritime law attorney must be contacted immediately so as to maximize the recovery of a potential personal injury claim or lawsuit, and more importantly to not jeopardize the investigation and fact-gathering process that must be done as early as possible and is absolutely critical in litigating against a cruise line.

Most passengers feel safe at sea and are confident that, whichever activity they chose to purchase, the cruise line has done its homework and would not risk the safety and livelihood of its passengers. That misconception has led to countless incidents. Worse, it has led passengers to trusting the cruise line in rectifying their mistakes, or acts of negligence.

Contact a cruise ship injury attorney as soon as you board off the ship
Most, if not all, cruise lines have important procedural conditions that all passengers must know prior to embarking on a cruise. One of these procedural conditions is the time frame within which an injured person must act in order to file a claim against the cruise line. Cruise lines have uniformly imposed a one-year statute of limitations on any and all personal injury claims against them. If a lawsuit is not filed within one year of the incident which caused a person's injury, that passenger's claim will be barred forever. Not only that, Cruise Lines have also uniformly and arbitrarily imposed a six-month notification deadline.

The clock on your potential personal injury claim starts ticking the day the incident happens, and if you wait too long, your case, which could have been worthy of representation months prior, could be turned down simply because it is too late to act. You must protect yourself and do your due diligence by contacting a reputable maritime law attorney as soon as possible after you return home from the cruise.

Do not trust the Cruise Line's claims management process
Many passengers will elect to resolve their injury claim on their own. They will contact the claims management department several weeks after the incident and attempt to obtain a recovery without any professional help. That is the second biggest mistake you can make.

Like any insurance company, the claims management department's objective is to avoid compensating injured passengers. To achieve their mean, several tactics are employed in almost every single claim:

First, the person assigned to your case will ask to obtain a statement from you about the incident. They will only ask questions that may put the blame on the injured person and not ask or inquire about any facts that may or may not show the cruise line's negligence.

Second, they will stall the claim's process. By now, the incident occurred several weeks, if not a couple of months ago. They will ask that you provide a copy of all of your medical records, and medical bills, so the claims department can "evaluate" your damages. Some passengers are quick to obtain medical records, but most are not knowledgeable enough and several months will go by before the claims person will be in possession of your medical records and bills.

The next step is full denial. At that point, the cruise line has all of your records, it has an idea of the damages you have sustained in the incident, and it also knows how the incident happened. They will invariably tell you that the statement you have given to the ship's doctor or the ship's security staff is inconsistent with the statement you gave over the phone. Or they will tell you that the damages you are seeking are unrelated to the injury you claim you sustained in the incident. Or they will dispute the charges you claim you have incurred, or stress the fact that your health insurance paid for your bills and therefore your medical bills are irrelevant. Or they will insist on telling you that they need more time to make sure their investigation is concluded before they can either deny the claim, or make your an offer.

Continue reading "Injured on a cruise ship? You need a cruise ship injury lawyer!" »

Article written by Robert D. Peltz and Carol L. Finklehoffe of Leesfield & Partners, P.A. Published in the Massachusetts Academy of Trial Attorneys Journal.

The allure of exotic foreign ports and exciting new excursions form the centerpiece of the advertising campaigns of cruise lines, whether in the broadcast, print or electronic media:

• Parasailing in St. Thomas
• Zip lining in Costa Rica
• Snorkeling in the lagoons of Bermuda
• Jungle trekking by ATV in Cozumel
• Alpine hiking on Alaskan glaciers

Port excursions are not directed to just the adventurous, but to even the older and more timid passengers, extolling the virtues of

• Driving the scenic mountains of Tortola
• Learning the secrets of the cooks of Caribbean by visiting local villages in Dominica
• Visiting the Mayan ruins at Tulum

Over the past decade, the number of passengers cruising with North America's largest cruise lines has literally exploded. According to industry figures, the number of passengers has dramatically increased from 9.5 million in 2003 to over 16 million passengers forecasted to cruise in 2012. As the industry itself is quick to admit, at least to its shareholders and tour excursion partners, the continued development of new and existing excursions has played a major role in this growth.

Nevertheless, at the first sign of an excursion gone awry, the cruise lines have been quick to try and disassociate themselves from responsibility for their own creations. In an effort to insulate themselves from liability, the cruise lines have utilized a system of disclaimers, which attempt to hide the true character of their relationships with their tour operating partners. These disclaimers are typically buried in the fine print in the passenger's ticket of passage and in self-serving statements inserted into the cruise lines' contract's with their tour operators.

There is typically a wide divergence, however, between these self-serving statements and the facts on the ground when it comes to describing the cruise lines actual relationship with its excursion partners. Overcoming these inaccurate self-serving and inaccurate descriptions contained in the carrier's written and electronic materials therefore typically becomes the first order of business.

Click here to read more about out firm's cruise ship litigation practice

Contrary to these disclaimers, the most accurate description of the relationship between the carrier and its tour operating partners is best characterized by the joint venture. Nevertheless, because of the degree of control maintained by the carrier, various other agency relationships are equally as applicable in most cases. This article will discuss the nature of these various relationships, strategies for holding both the carrier and tour operator responsible for their conduct and the discovery which will be helpful in the process.

Holding the Tour Operator Responsible

Although most of the attention in excursion cases is typically focused on holding the cruise line responsible for its negligence, it is important not to overlook the case against the tour operator. Sometimes, one gets lucky and the tour operator is located in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico or some other domestic location. Most of the time, however, that is not the case. Nevertheless, that is not reason for despair.

Continue reading "Navigating the Obstacles Created by Cruise Lines in Shore Excursion Tragedies" »

The Carnival Dream is the third ship in less than 2 years that has encountered serious propulsion, and engine issues, severe enough to prompt Carnival to seek rescue from the Coast Guards (Carnival Splendor & Carnival Triumph). The Carnival Dream is the latest incident where thousands of passengers were stranded in St. Marteen. Thankfully, Carnival did not make the decision to sail away despite mechanical issues, rather the Captain of the Carnival Dream opted to fly out all passengers back to the United States.

This latest event has prompted Senator John Rockefeller IV, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation, to write a letter to Micky Arison, Chairman and CEO of Carnival Corp., and Carnival PLC. The letter can be downloaded here and is reproduced below:

In the last 3 years, the cruise line industry has been dealt blows that would have knocked out any other business. Starting in 2010 with the fire aboard the Carnival Splendor, followed over a year ago with the deadly incident of the Costa Concordia. This month, another fire broke out aboard the Carnival Triumph, causing over 3,000 people to be stranded at sea for several days, forced to live in unsanitary conditions reminiscent of a third-world country slum.

Yet, Carnival Cruise Lines, and the rest of the cruise industry continues to strive and attract more passengers than ever. Translation: the cruise industry is bringing record revenues and earnings despite tragedies blames on cruise employees (Concordia) and business decisions made by some of the richest executives who working in the leisure business.

In a recent op-ed piece published in The Globe, the writer discusses the role of the media in manufacturing horror stories, mainly stemming from the Carnival Triumph fire, while disputing that there even was an incident worth reporting about. Kyle writes: "The Carnival Triumph cruise was supposed to last four days, and go to Cozumel, Mexico. That was before the engine fire, which crippled the ship and knocked out its propeller system, as well as sewage and air conditioning, according to the New York Times. The worst part of the incident was the sewage that leaked and soaked the carpets throughout the ship. Other than that, the patrons of the ship were simply inconvenienced." The author makes several comparisons between the Costa Concordia and the Carnival Triumph calling one a tragedy and the other a mere inconvenience. Kyle concludes: "I think that some of the passengers of the ship need to suck it up; it's not like it was the Titanic."

As much as the article minimizes the dreadful experience of the passengers and crew-members aboard the Triumph, the attempt is futile and misguided. Carnival certainly did not treat the incident as something they could sweep under the rug. However - and that is the important factor - Carnival would not have responded the way it did, had the media not blasted images of the stranded ship on cable news, not reported lived from Mobile, AL, when the ship returned safely to the mainland, not shown photos taken by passengers depicting the vile conditions aboard a luxurious cruise ship.

The reason why the media's reporting is crucial in the aftermath of those cruise tragedies, is because passengers cannot bring light of their experience any other way than through the media. As discussed in our latest post "Can I sue Carnival Cruise Lines for the Carnival Triumph fire?" cruise lines have drafted iron-tight terms and conditions applicable to every single cruise passenger, that passengers have no outlet to voice their displeasure, or in the Carnival Triumph case, the dangerous and unsanitary conditions.

More importantly, The New York Times reported this week that, despite a similar fire in 2010, Carnival has failed to equip its ships with proper backup power systems. Cruise lines have made the business decision to maximize the numbers of boardable passengers to the detriment of safety. The vast majority of cruise ships currently floating on the planet's oceans are not equipped with any backup system in case of a loss of power. As Jim Walker noted in his recent article, loss of power on a large cruise ship carries potentially fatal risks such as listing.

In case evacuating a stranded cruise ship becomes necessary, crew-members will not be able to lower the lifeboats without power. One can easily understand the gravity of such incidents, something The Globe's reporter failed to fathom.

In 2010, a fire broke out in the engine room of the Carnival Splendor, disabling the large cruise ship, leaving thousands of passengers and crew-members stranded at sea for days. In early 2012, the Costa Concordia ran aground after its captain committed the unthinkable, which caused the death of 32 people. Despite these avoidable tragedies, and the public relations storm it found itself in at the time, Carnival Cruise Lines is reporting steady revenues and earnings.

For 2010, Carnival reported revenues of $14.4 billions. In 2011 and 2012, revenues increased to $15.7B and $15.3B respectively. While posting very strong revenues, the company's earnings are just as strong, posting earnings of $2.42B in 2011, followed by $1.88B in 2012.

Tragedies and public relations disasters affect Carnival, and the entire cruise industry, relatively mildly compared to other businesses. Empirical data shows that the public at large, and cruise line customers have a very short collective memory when it comes to vacationing on a luxurious cruise ship. Since 2006, North American cruise passengers have steadily increased from 9.13 to 9.72 million in 2011. Worldwide in 2010, it is estimated that cruise ships were visited by 14.3 million passengers.

The question begging to be answered is, even if the public's collective memory fades so rapidly that it does not affect traffic and consumption, why aren't cruise lines taking a financial hit for their serious miscues? Answer is simple: Cruise lines do not respond to anyone or anything.

Let's look at the thousands of passengers who were stranded aboard the Carnival Triumph for 5 days in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico. The only thing Carnival can reasonably fear is that they lost 3,143 customers for life. That is a drop in their books. The cruise line industry responds to nobody because cruise companies have handcuffed their passengers in disclaiming the cruise line's responsibility for everything that happens on their ship, except their own negligence (46 U.S.C.A. § 30509 expressly invalidates any contract provision aiming to limit a ship's liability for its own negligence to its passengers, but is limited to cruises visiting a U.S. port.)

Cruise lines know that their ticket-contract provisions are essentially "almighty" and have been interpreted and declared legal and binding by competent courts. Prior to embarking on the Carnival Triumph, all passengers received a ticket which contains the following:

"Carnival shall not be liable to the passenger for damages for emotional distress, mental suffering/anguish or psychological injury of any kind under any circumstances, except when such damages were caused by the negligence of Carnival and resulted from the same passenger sustaining actual physical injury, or having been at risk of actual physical injury, or when such damages are held to be intentionally inflicted by Carnival."

Carnival also disclaims that the ship is not responsible for, and entitled to do anything its Captain decides in the event of a "breakdown of the vessel". The ticket also contains a "Class Action Waiver" which provides that passengers waive the right to form a class action to seek recovery. In cases where the passengers only claim is a ruined vacation, class actions may be the only form of effective remedy. The legal validity of the clauses is still an open question.

Under what circumstances could a Carnival Triumph passenger sue Carnival?
Carnival can be sued if its ship committed an act of negligence that resulted in a passenger's physical injury. For instance, if a passenger slips on urine in the middle of a hallway, and ends up fracturing a hip, Carnival can be held responsible. A passenger, who becomes physically ill from the poor conditions or contracts an illness, will also likely have a valid claim against Carnival. But the hundreds of passengers, who were "merely" subjected to sleeping on the floor with hundreds of other people in hallways flooded with urine smells and worse, will have a much more difficult time asserting claims. Although claims for so-called negligent infliction of emotional distress are allowed in certain circumstances, they are generally limited to situations where the passenger was within the "zone of danger" of physical harm and suffered an emotional injury with some physical manifestation or psychological diagnosis.

Recently, Leesfield & Partners very successfully resolved a cruise passenger claim after our client fell due to conditions caused by a fire on board a different ship that had left the vessel stranded in the middle of the ocean, thereby creating an unstable platform for walking.

Continue reading "Can I sue Carnival Cruise Lines for the Carnival Triumph fire?" »

Several days ago, the Carnival Triumph, operated by Carnival Cruise Lines, became inoperative after a fire broke out in one of the engine rooms. On board, 3,143 passengers and 1,086 crew members are stranded with limited food, no air conditioning, only a few working toilets.

According to a CNN report, passengers who are now enduring their third day adrift at sea are commonly seeing "sewage running down the walls and floors." Carnival has asked all people on board to defecate in bags and urinate in showers. If hungry, passengers have to mustard waiting in line for over three and half hours to eat cold meals. Due to the lack of air conditioning and gaining bad smells throughout the ship, more and more people are sleeping out on the decks.

Photograph courtesy of NBC News - The Today Show

This latest event on a Carnival cruise ship should not come as a surprise. Back on November 8, 2010, the Carnival Splendor endured the same fate. A 7-day cruise to Mexico turned nightmarish for its 3,299 passengers and 1,167 crew members after a fire broke out in the engine room. The ship was approximately 150 miles south of San Diego, CA. It took hours for Carnival crew members to extinguish the fire, and several people were injured in the panic.

Much like passengers aboard the Carnival Triumph are experiencing now, passengers of the Carnival Splendor had very little to eat for days, and suffered through 96 hours of extremely poor hygienic conditions.

Several months after the Splendor fire, it was finally determined that the fire emerged from the aft engine room, and that second engine room of the ship failed to start, which should have allowed to maintain power throughout the ship.

The Carnival Triumph is scheduled to be towed back to the United States and arrive in Mobile, AL on Thursday. The Carnival Splendor was also towed by a tug boat, back to San Diego, CA.

Carnival so far is reporting that all passengers are safe and no injuries were sustained as a result of the fire. Carnival's statement is eerily similar to the statement made in the aftermath of the Carnival Splendor fire, yet it was inaccurate. Carnival Cruise, like any other cruise line, is held to the same standard of providing a safe environment for its passengers at all times, whether an emergency occurs during the cruise or not.

Could stranded passengers hold Carnival accountable for this preventable mess?
The answer is probably not. the fire aboard the Splendor gave Carnival the opportunity to find out what to do if such circumstances were to happen again. Carnival has jumped in front of the problem this time around. Carnival will refund all passengers aboard the Triumph, and will refund the cruise tickets of all passengers scheduled to sail aboard the Triumph for weeks to come. Accepting a refund does not waive a passenger's rights to file a lawsuit against Carnival, but it certainly hinders the perception that passengers were not taken care of by the cruise line.

Secondly, and most importantly, the emergency aboard the Triumph does not change the existing thresholds in order to sue any cruise line. For one, a passenger will have to show that they have sustained a personal injury. Without provable and legitimate damages, a lawsuit will be dismissed within weeks of being filed. Second, even if a passenger sustains legitimate injuries, they must prove that their injuries were caused by Carnival's negligence. Alleging that passengers have a claim for damages against the cruise line simply because their cruise/vacation were ruined by the fire is not enough.

Continue reading "Fire on Carnival Cruise Ship for the second time - Cruise Passengers stranded in the middle of the ocean" »

The District Court for the Southern District of Florida just issued an Order granting Carnival Corporation's motion to dismiss a personal injury claim stemming from the Costa Concordia tragedy of January 2012.

This decision marks the first of its kind pertaining to a personal injury claim brought in Florida against the cruise line. In this case, several plaintiffs from Massachusetts filed a lawsuit in the Souther District of Florida against the operator and owner of the Costa Concordia (Costa Crociere, Costa Cruise Lines, Carnival Corporation, and Carnival Plc).

Judge Dimitrouleas rendered a 23-page decision which dismissed the plaintiffs' personal injury claims, asserting in no uncertain terms that the Court was "thoroughly convinced that dismissal in favor of an Talian forum is proper." The Court motivated its decision after "having carefully considered the balance of the factors against the strong pesumption in favor of Plaintiffs' choice of forum." In the end, every single factor weighed in by the Court tilted in favor of the Defendant.

Click below to read and download the order of February 4, 2013.

Wilhelmina Warrick v. Carnival Corporation et. al., Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Based on Forum Selection Clause and Forum Non Conveniens

Last week, Australian authorities confirmed that 24-year-old Jackie Kastrinelis had died aboard the Seven Seas Voyager operated by Regent Seven Seas Cruises. Regent Seven Seas Cruises is based out of Miami, along with the other more well-known cruise lines suck as Royal Caribbean, Carnival Cruises, Celebrity, or Norwegian Cruise Lines.

Details of Jackie Kastrinelis' death have been far and few between. To date, the authorities have confirmed that Jackie's body was discovered on Sunday in her cabin aboard the cruise ship. While investigators denied the existence of any evidence of foul play, an autopsy was performed Monday morning, leaving the possibility that the young woman's death may have been caused by drugs or alcohol.

Jackie Kastrinelis was an employee aboard the Seven Seas Voyager. She worked as a singer and performer. She began her working career with Regent Seven Seas Cruise in March 2011 when she was offered a contract to perform for guests aboard ships while cruising around the world. At the time, Ms. Kastrinelis was a recent graduate of the University of Hartford (2010) where she received a bachelor's degree in Fine Arts.

The Australian authorities initially treated the cabin where the body was found as a crime scene. They however quickly determined that there was no evidence of a crime having been committed. The results of the autopsy could shed more lights on what caused the death of the young woman, and determine for certain whether an outside element contributed to her death. Some unknown sources have reported to the local media that Jackie may have sustained a head injury during rehearsals one day earlier. The injury was deemed serious enough that she was seen by the ship doctor and given medication that day.

If the results of the autopsy point to an extensive head injury sustained within 12 to 24 hours of Jackie's death, many questions pointing to the cruise ship's medical care and lack thereof will have to be answered. As an employee of a cruise ship, the cruise line has a non-delegable duty to treat its employees, including specialized care. If a ship doctor is found to have treated an employee below the standard of care, the cruise line is the ultimate liable defendant.

That situation is very distinct from situations where injured passengers cannot bring lawsuits against a cruise line for the ship's doctor malpractice. In those latter claims, the courts deem ship doctors to be independent contractors and cruise lines are therefore not responsible for their malpractice. This leaves a flurry of injured passengers having to sue the ship doctors personally for their subpar medical treatment, which rarely amounts to any recovery because ship doctors do not carry medical malpractice insurance.

Leesfield & Partners' maritime lawyer Robert Peltz recently wrote an article published in the University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal titled "Has time passed Barbetta by?". In his article, Peltz addresses many situations, including the responsibility and liability of cruise lines for their ship doctors' malpractice in treating cruise employees.

You are on your cruise, walking around and enjoying the amenities. Then, all of a sudden, without warning, you are on the ground. You realize you have slipped and fallen, seriously injuring yourself. However, just because you are injured, don't expect the cruise line to take responsibility for its negligence and compensate you.

Slip and fall accidents can happen anywhere on cruise ship. Such accidents can be caused by any number of reasons: a foreign substance on the ground, wet floor from mopping, a spill that was not properly detected and cleaned up, lack of anti-slip or anti-skid material on the flooring, defective or missing treads on stairs, lack of warning of a dangerous condition, or even insufficient lighting.

Under the law, a cruise line owes its passengers a duty of "reasonable care under the circumstances." That is, the cruise line must take reasonable measure to ensure that the floors are free from foreign substances, spills promptly and timely cleaned up, physical or verbal warnings provided and ensure that the floor is otherwise maintained in a safe, clean, and dry condition. This duty requires a cruise line to take affirmative steps, such as have a reasonable inspection process in place, to timely detect and correct a dangerous condition.

To be found liable, a cruise line must have actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition to allow the cruise line an opportunity to correct it. That means the cruise either knew about the condition or the situation existed for a sufficient period of time that the cruise line should have discovered it.

The cruise line will undoubtedly argue that fall was your fault. It is standard for the cruise line to blame the passenger and claim that any dangerous condition was an "open and obvious" condition which you should have seen and avoided. The cruise line will also argue that it had no notice of the dangerous condition or it did not exist for a sufficient time to enable it an opportunity to detect it.

So, what do you do if you fall while on a cruise ship?
Take stock of the situation. Look around and determine what caused you to fall: Was there a foreign substance on the floor? Are your clothes or shoes wet? If there is a foreign substance, how big is it, what color is it (water, soda, coffee)? Can you tell the cause of the foreign substance (is there a leaking beverage machine, is there melting ice, was it a high traffic area where a fellow passenger could have spilled something)? Where there any warning signs in place? Where there any mats or other non-skip material in place?

The second most important thing you must do next is gather evidence. Concretely, this means: Get the names of any witnesses; if there are any crew-members present get their name and/or position; take photographs of the scene.

You must make sure that you (or if you can't, someone you are traveling with) reports the situation to the cruise line. The cruise line will give you a passenger statement form to complete. Be sure to indicate that your fall was a result of an accident and state the cause of the accident. For example: the floor was wet and I slipped, there were no warning signs present, etc. Once completed, demand a copy of your statement and medical records (if you were seen in the infirmary).

Next, demand the cruise line preserve surveillance footage. Cruise lines have security cameras throughout the vessel and will have likely captured your accident. This is important evidence which can help establish the cause of your accident, the length of time the dangerous condition existed, and the failure of the cruise line to take reasonable steps to detect and correct the dangerous condition. Remember to make this demand in writing.

These simple steps can help ensure the cruise line is held responsible for your injuries and that you are fully compensated.

Continue reading "Slip and Fall on a Cruise Ship - Not a rare occurrence" »

On November 7, 2012, Kyle Coleman was arrested and indicted in the parasailing accident which caused the death of Bernice Kraftcheck. Almost a year ago to the day, Coleman, 32, was the captain of a small boat Turtle, in charge of performing parasailing excursions for Caribbean Watersports & Tours, a corporation based out of the U.S. Virgin Island.

Bernice Kraftcheck and her daughter Danielle Haese were on a Celebrity Cruise at the time, aboard the Celebrity Eclipse. They purchased the St. Thomas shore excursion aboard the cruise ship. According to the indictment, when the mother/daughter tandem was lifted up in the parasail, the wind conditions were deteriorating rapidly. Within minutes, the tow-line broke due to increasingly strong winds, and caused the parasail and its two occupants to plummet from the sky and crash into the water. The force of the wind and the water condition were such that the parasail was continuously propelled and dragged the two passengers for several minutes, causing the death of Bernice and serious injuries to her daughter Danielle.

Since these tragic events took place last November, the Coast Guard performed a meticulous investigation by marine casualty investigators and special agents from San Juan. The Coast Guard inspected the vessel and found numerous inadequacies, including an inadequate tow-line, and deficient vessel equipment. The master on the vessel was also unlicensed at the time of the incident. Based on these findings and countless witness accounts, Coleman was arrested and charged by a federal grand jury with being responsible for the accident. The one-count indictment is pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 1115. Misconduct or neglect of ship officers. The statute provides in part that a captain employed on a vessel, by whose misconduct, negligence, or inattention to his duties, the life of any person is destroyed, shall be fined or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Last August, Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog reported that Coleman's actions triggered the Coast Guard to start a master license revocation procedure against the boat captain based on his acts and failures which caused the incident.

In an interview with the St. Thomas Source, Coast Guard Captain Drew W. Pearson of Sector San Juan said that "the Coast Guard takes safety at sea very seriously and will ensure that any mariner who causes another's death through misconduct, negligence and inattention to his duties is held accountable in a court of law."

This is the latest development in the personal injury case that Leesfield & Partners is litigating against Caribbean Watersports & Tours, and Celebrity Cruises, for the death of Bernice Kraftcheck and the catastrophic injuries to Danielle Haese, her daughter. The lawsuit against both entities was filed in February 2012 and a copy of the complaint can be found here:

Lawsuit Filed against Celebrity Cruises and Parasail Operator for the Wrongful Death of Cruise Passenger

In the last 20 years, parasailing has become more and more prevalent and popular among tourists who come to Florida as well as cruise passengers. Unfortunately, a large majority of people ignore that the parasailing industry is entirely self-regulated, which is synonymous with lack of safety and oversight. As a result, there is a growing history of fatal and catastrophic parasailing accidents that have occurred in Florida and throughout the Caribbean.

The last tragedy took place only two months ago when Kathleen Miskell, 28, was killed in an accident off the coast of Pompano Beach. At the time, personal Injury Attorney Ira Leesfield in an interview with the Miami Herald summed up the state of the parasail industry today: "There's no due diligence, no inspection. You just take your chances"

Leesfield & Partners has represented many victims and their families who have been injured in parasailing accidents, and as a result has been at the forefront of the movement pushing for regulations, clear guidelines, and oversight of the parasailing industry. So far, Florida legislators have failed to pass the necessary laws to make this popular industry safe. The indictment of Coleman is one more piece of evidence that begs for the passage of laws and standards and there is renewed hope that the legislator will finally take note and act.

Last March, we reported on the arrest of Norwegian Cruise Lines' Assistant Cruise Director, Senad Djedovic. Last week, U.S. District Judge Steven D. Merryday sentenced Djedovic to 9 years in federal prison.

The details of the alleged crimes were discussed in detail in our previous article: Norwegian Cruise Line's crewmember arrested after having sex with 16-year-old female passenger

Facing mounting evidence, Djedovic plead guilty to possessing child pornography last Summer. Investigators discovered photos and videos depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit acts on Djedovic's computers. Among them were approximately 20 photos sent by a 16-year-old female passenger whom Djedovic met on the Norwegian Star, a cruise ship Djedovic was assigned to as the Assistant Cruise Director.

Last May in Court, he admitted to having engaged in sexual acts with the minor girl while on the ship and to having exchanged explicit photos with her after the cruise. In his plea agreement, Djedovic declared that he knew the girl was 16-years-old and underage.

Ultimately, this crime and criminal would never have been discovered or prosecuted had Djedovic himself not bragged about it. Days after the cruise was over, Djedovic began talking about what he did to and in front of other crew-members, even showing to some of them the photos he had received from the minor passenger. One of the crew-members alerted the authorities and Djedovic was arrested shortly thereafter by the FBI.

Sex crimes aboard cruise ships are becoming more and more frequent and the prosecution of individuals who engage in sexual acts with minor passengers are prosecuted more and more often. This latest case is however very troubling because the criminal involved was a cruise employee. Djedovic was employed by Norwegian Cruise Lines from 2006 through 2012, until he was arrested.

Continue reading "Former Assistant Cruise Director for Norwegian Cruise Line sentenced to 9 years in Federal Prison on Child Pornography Charges" »

Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog reported last month that Casey Dickerson was arrested on rape charges. Dickerson was accused of having organized, initiated, and participated in the gang rape of a minor child while on a Carnival cruise, sailing on the Carnival Sensation.

The terrifying detail of the attack were disclosed here after Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog obtained a copy of the criminal complaint filed against the 31-year-old married man.

This week, a federal grand jury heard evidence and testimony surrounding the events that took place on August 19, 2012, in the ship's cabin U-212. The grand jury rendered its decision and indicted Dickerson on multiple sex charges. The defendant has been held in a Central Florida jail since his arrest on August 20, despite Dickerson claiming he did not have sex with the young child and that he was drunk at the time with limited recollection of the events.

It is unknown whether the State Attorney's office will seek criminal prosecution of the four other male teenagers who were present and participated in the gang rape as well.

While quietly monitoring the criminal case against Dickerson, Carnival Cruises has yet to address and explain why this incident took place. From the criminal complaint, it is now established that Dickerson purchased alcohol for several teenagers on a at least two separate occasions, including on the night the rape occurred.

Carnival advertises that it has a strict alcohol policy in effect on its ships and that employees are specifically trained to look for and be aware of minors drinking alcohol. At trial, we will know how and how much alcohol Dickerson purchased that night and why he was allowed to roam the ship with alcohol and make his way to his cabin. Among Carnival's policies, if one passenger purchases alcohol in large quantity for a large group of people, Carnival employees must request the photo ID of every single person who will be drinking. That is to prevent underage passengers to ask an adult to buy alcohol for them. If this policy had been followed on the Carnival Sensation, the teenagers would not have been able to get their hands on any alcohol that night, and would not have "befriended" Dickerson on the ship.

Moreover, Carnival has yet to justify their decision of allowing Dickerson and his wife to have access to two cabins throughout the entire cruise. As we reported here, Dickerson's wife complained to Carnival's staff that the cabin assigned to them was extremely noisy. As a result, they were given the key to another cabin. Carnival however failed to demand Dickerson to return the key to the first cabin. The spare cabin was used as a party room and created a dangerously unsafe and unmonitored environment. As a policy, Carnival employees must secure and lock all vacant and unused rooms. That policy is not only true for private cabins, but also for areas on the ship that are closed after hours.

We will learn a lot more about what exactly happened at the criminal trial of Dickerson. Date of trial has not yet been set by the court.

This week in Rome, court-appointed experts have presented their 270-page analysis on what truly happened on the evening of January 13, 2012, which saw the cruise liner Costa Concordia hit rocks off the Tuscan island of Giglio and finished its course beached on its size. As a result of a series of the captain's reckless decisions and Costa Cruise Lines' incompetent employees, 32 people died that night.

You can read Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog's entire account and article on the incident of Costa Concordia here.

The court overseeing the criminal investigation in Rome, Italy, had named and ordered several experts to review the audio and navigational data extracted from the ship's black box. On Thursday, experts turned in their extensive report to the court, which was leaked the same day in the Italian press.

The report is damning to say the least.

Captain Schettino's Recklessness
The report points to the ship's captain's inability to grasp and fully understand what was happening. For well over 45 minutes, Schettino received reports after reports from his crew that the ship was flooding and the engines were dead. Despite the loss of power to the engine, the black out throughout the entire ship, as well as the ship dangerously tilting on its side, Schettino failed to give the "abandon ship" order.

Before the ship hit the rocks, experts confirmed that Schettino voluntarily ordered to deviate the ship off its course in order to perform a "salute" maneuver, which proved fatal for 32 people who were on the Costa Concordia. Before the ship hit the rocks, Schettino can be heard over the audio recordings joking with a bridge crew member who began to veer right when the order was to veer left. Schettino even added "otherwise we go on the rocks"

The report also confirmed that when the "abandon ship" order was finally given, Captain Schettino may already have been on his way to safety. The black box revealed that the order was issued by another officer from the bridge, which is another violation of maritime rules.

Costa Cruise Lines' Negligence
The court-appointed experts were also not kind towards the Cruise company owned by Carnival Cruises, based out of Miami, Florida. The report points to a serious lack of professional seriousness among the crew members and employees present on the bridge. The owner of the ship is blamed for delaying alerting coastal authorities about the incident, which further delayed any emergency and medical attention to the survivors.

The black box also revealed that crew-members on the bridge were having grave difficulties understanding each other and accomplishing the most simple tasks due to language barriers. Schettino joking with an officer that his poor understand of the italian language could result in the ship going "on the rocks" was alarming in the eyes of the maritime experts. Costa Cruise Lines is responsible for the hiring and training of officers trusted with the lives of thousands of cruise passengers. Yet, that night, on the Costa Concordia, passengers were led by a team of crew-members that did not understand each other, and whose lack of training and certifications, contributed to the loss of lives.

While the next hearing in Rome is scheduled for October 15, 2012, there are still cases being filed by american passengers in the USA. Below is a short AP video interview of Leesfield & Partners' maritime attorney, Robert Peltz:

As last reported two months ago, Leesfield & Partners filed a lawsuit against Princess Cruises on June 5, 2012, on behalf of Fernando Osorio's parents in the United States District Court Southern District of Florida. The lawsuit is based upon the death of Fernando amd asserts Princess Star's failure to rescue his vessel in distress, the Fifty Cent, after its crew was alerted by three passengers that they had spotted a small boat adrift over 125 miles from shore, whose occupants were signaling for help.

Fernando Osorio, Adrian Vasquez and Elvis Diaz were fishing off the coast of Rio Hato, Panama, when the engine of the 26-foot panga boat broke down. After being adrift for 15 days and 14 nights without power, the three occupants saw a cruise ship in the middle of the ocean and began signaling and waving t-shirts and life jackets in an attempt to be seen by someone on the large cruise ship.

Their wish came true when several cruise passengers spotted the three men and the Fifty Cent. The passengers, who were using optical equipment to look for birds alerted a crew member who they asked to alert the Captain immediately. As the passengers listened on, the crew member called the bridge and advised of the disabled boat. During the process, they also showed the crew member the distressed vessel through their optical gear, and he confirmed to them he had seen the same thing they had. To their dismay, nothing happened.

Approximately two weeks later, a commercial fishing vessel rescued the drifting fishing boat near the Galapagos Islands. On board, the rescuers found only one survivor, Adrian Vasquez, 18. The other occupants, Fernando Osorio, 16, and Elvis Diaz, died in the days following the sight of the cruise ship and their decomposed bodies were eventually placed overboard.

You can read Cruise Ship Lawyers Blog's entire coverage of this case here, including a copy of the complaint available for download.

Yesterday, Princess Cruises issued a press release which disputes that the vessel in distress identified in the photograph above, and taken by passenger Jeff Gilligan, is the Fifty Cent, but rather another adrift vessel with the same blue awning and same three occupants. This latest attempt at trying this case in the media by Princess Cruises falls short, as stated below by Robert Peltz, attorney for the Osorio family:

"This is the ultimate desperation "Hail Mary" pass with no time on the clock from 90 yards out and not a very good attempt at that. Princess has paid a lot of money to a so-called expert to compare an out-of-focus grainy picture taken from several miles away with what Princess itself describes as a "computer stitched image" of the Fifty Cent adapted from a cell phone video taken off the boat when it was rescued at a different angle and different lighting conditions.

The facts are simple and straight forward. The picture taken by passenger Jeff Gilligan shows the Fifty Cent and Adrian Vasquez, Fernando Osorio and Elvis Diaz frantically holding up a shirt and a life preserver trying to get the Princess cruise ship to rescue them. Princess can hire and pay "experts" as much as they want to give them a way out and it won't work. A jury will decide this case and hold them accountable and make them take responsibility....because they obviously are incapable of that."

While Princess represented to the public in a prior press release that "We all understand that it is our responsibility and also the law of the sea to provide assistance to any vessel in distress," in the lawsuit filed by the families of the two deceased young men and the sole survivor out of the public view, Princess has represented to the court that while "its officers have a moral duty to render aid to vessels and persons at sea when they recognize [they are] . . . in distress" that it has "no legal duty" to do so. It seems that the latest press release is more of the same.

Princess' latest press release seems all about avoiding responsibility for its actions and the public scorn that has arisen as a result. Instead of accepting responsibility, and ensuring that this does not happen again, Princess has paid "experts" to desperately find a way out to avoid accountability for the devastation to the families of the deceased young men and the sole survivor of his unimaginable ordeal. Princess is now assailing the credibility of the survivor and its own passengers who saw and reported the obviously stranded boat to the Princess crew member.

Excerpts of Peltz' statement were published in the latest article published in the Miami Herald: Princess Cruises denies passing by boat with dying fishermen.

Florida Injury Lawyer Blawg obtained the complaint filed in Federal Court against Casey Dickerson on August 20, 2012. The investigation and interviews conducted by Federal Special Agent, Christopher Williams, describe a savage attack on a defenseless and inebriated minor child. The complaint is available below for download.

According to the complaint filed in the Middle District of Florida, Casey Dickerson, 31, was a passenger on the Carnival Sensation that left Port Canaveral on August 16, scheduled to return at the same port on August 19. Dickerson and his wife were originally assigned to stay in cabin E-153. Due to Dickerson's spouse complaints about noise, Carnival reassigned the couple to cabin U-212. Somehow Casey Dickerson retained possession of the key card of the first cabin and right to use both cabins.

On August 19, Carnival contacted the FBI to report an alleged sexual assault on a minor female passenger that occurred during the early morning hours of August 19, 2012. Special Agent Williams met with the victim immediately after the ship docked in Port Canaveral. The young girl provided gruesome details on what she went through that night. The victim, along with a female friend of hers, who is also 15, and four other male minors that she knew, went to Dickerson's cabin U-212.

Once inside the cabin, the victim said that she was held down by Dickerson and some of the other males, and all took turns raping her. While the attack was going on, the victim's female friend was being held by one of boys in the cabin's bathroom. At one point, the victim said that Dickerson was having vaginal sex with her, stopped, and walked to the bathroom door to make sure the friend would not come out and tell the boy who was inside the bathroom with her to "get it on" and to "show her a good time". While at the door, Dickerson also encouraged the two other boys who were holding the victim down to "switch" and take turn raping the victim.

Continue reading "Horrifying details emerge in gang-rape of 15-year-old female passenger" »