Luther v. Carnival Corp.
99 F. Supp. 3d 1368
S.D. Fla.2015Background
- Plaintiff Gail Luther slipped and suffered a traumatic hip injury on Carnival Sensation’s outdoor wooden deck after earlier rain while she was a passenger viewing lifeboats following an indoor muster meeting.
- Luther observed the deck was wet and testified she stepped "prudently," acknowledging the risk of a wet surface.
- There is no allegation or evidence that the deck was defectively designed, unreasonably slippery when wet, or that similar prior incidents occurred at the same location.
- Plaintiff suggested Carnival should have inspected or prepared the Lido deck after the meeting but did not identify specific remedial measures or cite record evidence of notice.
- Defendant moved for summary judgment; the court reviewed undisputed facts and found no genuine issue for trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether shipowner breached duty by not acting regarding the wet deck | Carnival should have inspected/prepared the deck after the meeting | Wet conditions from rain are open and obvious; no duty to warn or act | No breach; summary judgment for defendant |
| Whether defendant had notice of a risk-creating condition | Implied that Carnival should have known or acted | No evidence of actual or constructive notice of an unreasonably slippery condition or prior similar accidents | No actionable notice shown |
| Whether the danger required a warning | Danger posed by wet deck warranted warning/precaution | Duty to warn extends only to non‑apparent dangers; wet deck was apparent | No duty to warn; danger was open and obvious |
| Whether plaintiff’s awareness precludes liability | Plaintiff claims defendant’s inaction caused injury despite awareness | Plaintiff observed wet deck and testified she appreciated the risk | Plaintiff’s awareness of the hazard supports summary judgment for defendant |
Key Cases Cited
- Keefe v. Bahama Cruise Line, Inc., 867 F.2d 1318 (11th Cir. 1989) (maritime duty: shipowner liable for negligence, not as insurer)
- Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625 (U.S. 1959) (shipowner’s duty to exercise reasonable care to passengers)
- Chaparro v. Carnival Corp., 693 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 2012) (elements of negligence under maritime law)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment standard and genuine dispute test)
- Jones v. Otis Elevator Co., 861 F.2d 655 (11th Cir. 1988) (admissibility of prior incidents requires substantial similarity)
- N.V. Stoomvaart Maatschappij "Nederland" v. Throner, 345 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1965) (limits on duty to warn for obvious dangers)
- Luby v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 633 F. Supp. 40 (S.D. Fla. 1986) (duty to warn limited to non‑apparent dangers)