Harness v. Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.. Filing fee $ 350.00 receipt number 113C-3942877, filed by Martha Ann Harness. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summon(s))(Billera, John)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. ________________________
MARTHA ANN HARNESS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD.,
a foreign corporation,
Defendant.
_____________________________/
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, MARTHA ANN HARNESS, individually, and pursuant
to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby files her Complaint to sue the
Defendant, ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., a foreign corporation, and as
grounds therefore states as follows:
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1. That is an action for negligence arising out of an injury occurring on the cruise
ship M/V FREEDOM OF THE SEAS which was owned and operated by Defendant
ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD. (hereinafter “RCCL”), a Liberian corporation with
its principal place of business in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1333, this Court has original jurisdiction over this
matter as this lawsuit arises out of a maritime and admiralty claim and is controlled by
the general maritime law of the United States.

1

3. Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to the passenger ticket contract issued
by Defendant RCCL containing a forum selection clause which requires all disputes and
matters arising out of and in connection with the subject cruise be litigated in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.
4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over RCCL because Defendant has, at all
times relevant to this cause of action, through its agents, officers, distributors, and/or
representatives:
a) Operated, conducted, engaged in, and/or carried on a business venture in
Florida and has an office in Florida;
b) Used, possessed, or held a mortgage or other lien on real property within
Florida; and/or
c) Engaged in substantial and not isolated activities within Florida by maintaining
stores, offices, employees, distributors, and/or registered agents in Florida,
selling products in Florida, advertising products in Florida, or entering into
contracts in Florida.
d) Additionally, pursuant to its travel document, Defendant submits itself to the
jurisdiction of this Court.
5. That all times material hereto the Defendant, RCCL, was and is a foreign
corporation, with its principal place of business in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and was
and is a business entity and common carrier engaged in the shipping and passenger
cruise business.

2

6. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the Plaintiff, MARTHA ANN HARNESS,
was a citizen of the United States and was and is a resident of Hillsborough County,
State of Florida, and was and is sui juris.
7. That on or about May 10, 2011 the Plaintiff, MARTHA ANN HARNESS, was
lawfully and properly a fare-paying passenger and business invitee on board the vessel
FREEDOM OF THE SEAS.
8. At all material times hereto, Defendant owed a duty to Plaintiff of using
reasonable care under the circumstances in maintaining the premises of the M/V
FREEDOM OF THE SEAS in a reasonably safe condition and operating the vessel in a
reasonably safe manner.
9. Plaintiff was walking in a normal manner in the M/V FREEDOM OF THE
SEAS’ passenger walkways when she tripped and fell over a dangerous tripping
hazard. The hazard was a raised molding located between a carpeted and noncarpeted surface which was apparently designed to hold the carpet in place, but which
in fact created a tripping hazard.
10. As a result of the uneven and dangerous tripping hazard, Plaintiff fractured
her hip, elbow, and other parts of her body and mind as well.
11. The accident occurred due to the unsafe design and condition of the walkway
and deck, and the negligent failure to properly maintain and repair the area, and
Defendant’s negligent failure to correct the dangerous condition and/or warn Plaintiff of
the aforementioned conditions.

3

12. Defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous and unsafe
conditions alleged above, and failed to take reasonable steps to correct the hazards or
warn Plaintiff of the hazards.
13. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained
injuries to her body and mind.
14. All pre-conditions to this action have been met or waived.
COUNT I - NEGLIGENCE
15. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 as if set forth herein
in extenso and further alleges:
16. On or about May 10, 2011, and continuing thereafter, Defendant breached
the duty owed to Plaintiff by committing one or more of the following acts and/or was
negligent in the operation, maintenance or control of the M/V FREEDOM OF THE SEAS
in the following respects:
a. Failing to exercise reasonable care for the safety of its passengers, including
Plaintiff, and creating a dangerous condition in and around the walkway and deck;
b. Failing to provide a reasonable deck surface for passengers, reasonably
designed for the safety of its passengers;
c. Failing to properly maintain the walkway and deck for use by passengers,
including Plaintiff;
d. Failing to properly inspect the walkway and deck prior to the incident in
question;
e. Failing to properly test, clean, and/or repair the walkway and deck prior to the
incident in question;

4

f. Failing to warn passengers, including Plaintiff, whom Defendant knew or should
have known would be using the walkway and deck of the dangerous condition which
existed when passengers used those areas of the ship;
g. Failing to use appropriate materials in and about the walkway and deck;
h. Allowing a dangerous condition to exist notwithstanding prior incidents
involving similar accidents aboard the M/V FREEDOM OF THE SEAS and other vessels
in its fleet of cruise ships;
i. Failing to adequately investigate prior and subsequent incidents involving
similar circumstances on the M/V FREEDOM OF THE SEAS and other vessels in its
fleet of cruise ships;
j. Failing to post adequate warnings to passengers of the dangerous and unsafe
condition in and about the walkway and deck of the M/S LIBERTY OF THE SEAS and
other vessels in its fleet of cruise ships;
k. Failing to provide a carpet molding which was properly designed and
functioning;
l. Failing to appropriately mark the carpet molding; and
m. Other acts of fault and negligence which will be proven at the trial of this
matter.
17. Said unreasonably dangerous conditions existed for a sufficient amount of
time that Defendant knew or should have known of said dangerous conditions and
should have taken steps to correct the unsafe conditions in a timely manner. Defendant
was on actual or constructive notice of the presence of said conditions.

5

18. Defendant was also on constructive notice of the unsafe condition in that it
chose an unsafe design of the area in question, including a design with a raised carpet
molding, thereby causing a tripping hazard where passengers and business invitees
were expected to walk. Said negligent selection and design make Defendant liable for
actually creating the unreasonably dangerous condition which caused Plaintiff’s injuries.
19. Further, Defendant chose a dangerous design in failing to place a flat or even
carpet molding, as opposed to a raised molding, in the area of the walkway where
passengers are expected to walk. Said negligent selection and design of the area in
question makes Defendant liable for actually creating the dangerous condition which
caused Plaintiffs’ injuries.
20. RCCL, at all material times, also had a non-delegable duty as a ship operator
to comply with the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, which requires vessel
operators to establish safeguards against identified risks aboard vessels, such as
tripping and slipping hazards, including an unreasonably dangerous floor that lacks a
sufficient coefficient of friction to prevent serious injury to invitees when wet.
21. Upon information and belief (and based on the unreasonably dangerous
condition of the raised carpet molding in a high traffic area), Plaintiff states that prior to
the incident involving the Plaintiff, several passengers had tripped and fallen, or
experienced “near misses”, on the same or similar raised carpet molding, or on similar
floors throughout RCCL’s entire fleet of vessels, and Defendant and/or its crew
members, and/or its personnel were well aware of this historical information.
22. RCCL, at all material times, breached its aforementioned non-delegable
duties by failing to inspect or maintain the subject raised carpet molding, and/or by

6

selecting a flooring that was unreasonably dangerous, which constituted an
unreasonable risk of harm to its passengers, including the Plaintiff.
23. Defendant’s negligence, as described above, caused the injuries Plaintiff
complains of in this lawsuit.
24. The conduct of Defendant, as described above, directly and proximately
caused the injuries and damages to Plaintiff, as follows:
a. Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer bodily injury, physical pain and
suffering, mental anguish, disability, disfigurement, physical impairment, inconvenience,
loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, lost wages, and diminishment of earning
capacity;
b. Plaintiff has incurred medical, hospital, nursing, therapy and pharmaceutical
expenses and will continue to incur such expenses as long as her condition continues;
and
c. Plaintiff has suffered an aggravation of a pre-existing condition.
25. Defendant is at fault for causing Plaintiff’s injuries and is liable to her for the
above described damages which are continuing and/or permanent in nature.
26. Plaintiff lost the value of the cruise, as well as attendant travel and airfare
expenses and related costs.
27. All conditions precedent to bringing this action have been satisfied.
28. Plaintiff demands trial by jury.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MARTHA ANN HARNESS, alleges negligence of
Defendant, ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., a foreign corporation, and prays that
judgment be entered in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant, for damages, costs,

7

interest, pre-judgment interest and for all such other relief to which Plaintiff may be
entitled by virtue of these proceedings.
Dated this 26th day of July, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
BILLERA LAW, PLLC
2024 Hollywood Blvd.
Hollywood, FL 33020
[phone]
[phone] (Fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
s/John F. Billera, Esq.
John F. Billera, Esq.
Florida Bar # 869041
[e-mail]

8