Where Do I File My Cruise Line Accident Case - Can I Sue in a State Other Than My Passenger Ticket?

Where Do I File My Cruise Line Accident Case - Can I Sue in a State Other Than My Passenger Ticket?
By Michael Ehline

Where do I file my cruise line accident case and can I sue somewhere else than my passenger ticket depends upon many factors. One factor is the passage contract itself and another factor is admiralty maritime law. In most instances, cruise lines attempt to have the legal actions against them heard in one state by a venue, or forum selection clause. Carnival Cruise Lines tries to keep lawsuits against them in Florida, while Princess Cruises try and keep lawsuits against them in Los Angeles, California. In this article we discuss the issue of can I file a cruise ship case in a state other than the one on my passage contract?

As of the writing of this article, the following laws applied and we make no representations that this will be the law at the time of the reading of this article and this is not to be construed as legal advice, but instead as an educational resource under the fair use doctrine. You are encouraged to hire an experienced cruise line lawsuit lawyer to explore in more detail your case, but invite you to read this legal research, to familiarize yourself with the legal principles contained herein.

LAW ON FORUM NON CONVENIENS

Can I sue in a state other than on my passenger ticket? One of the best arguments in voiding a forum selection clause, in effect keeping a Carnival Cruise Ship lawsuit in California, as opposed to Florida, is to argue forum non conveniens, or inconvenient forum, if you prefer. Federal maritime law applies a two-prong test to determine the enforceability of a forum-selection clause. First, the terms of the contract must be "reasonably communicated" to the passenger. Deiro v. American Airlines, Inc., 816 F.2d 1360, 1364 (9th Cir.1987). Second, the forum-selection clause must be "fundamentally fair." Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute, 499 U.S. 585, 111 S.Ct. 1522, 1528, 113 L.Ed.2d 622 (1991).

"the proper test of reasonable notice is an analysis of the overall circumstances on a case-by-case basis, with an examination not only of the ticket itself, but also of any extrinsic factors indicating the passenger's ability to become meaningfully informed of the contractual terms at stake." Id. at 1364 (citing Shankles, 722 F.2d at 866)

A passenger of a common carrier is contractually bound by the fine print of passenger ticket if the contract "reasonably communicate[s]" the existence of terms and conditions that affect legal rights. Deiro v. American Airlines, Inc., 816 F.2d 1360, 1364 (9th Cir.1987) (quoting Shankles v. Costa Armatori, S.P.A., 722 F.2d 861, 863-64 (1st Cir.1983)). Forum-selection clauses are presumptively valid and should be honored "absent some compelling and countervailing reason." Id. at 1231 (quoting The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 12, 92 S.Ct. 1907, 32 L.Ed.2d 513 (1972)). A court may refuse to enforce forum-selection clause for any of three reasons:

(1) "if the inclusion of the clause in the agreement was the product of fraud or overreaching"; (2) "if the party wishing to repudiate the clause would effectively be deprived of his day in court were the clause enforced"; and (3) "if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought." (Murphy, 349 F.3d at 1231-32.)

And the Supreme Court has noted, a cruise line has a "special interest" in controlling the fora in which claims against it can be litigated. Shute, 499 U.S. at 593. A cruise ship can carry passengers who reside in a variety of locations, which could subject the cruise line to litigation in several different fora. Id. Additionally, the forum-selection clause, by establishing beforehand the proper location of the suit, can spare the litigants, and courts, the time and expense of lengthy disputes regarding what forum is proper. Id. at 593-94.

These economies in litigation can benefit passengers in the form of lower fares. Id. at 594. Carnival also has a good reason for requiring litigation in Florida: this is where its principal place of business is located. As in Shute, here there appears to be "no indication that [Carnival] set Florida as the forum in which disputes were to be resolved as a means of discouraging cruise passengers from pursuing legitimate claims." Id. at 595.

But in Walker v. Carnival Cruise Lines (2000) 107 F.Supp.2d 1135 the Passengers sued cruise line and travel agents under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state law (Unruh?), based on alleged failure to provide appropriately accessible accommodations on a cruise ship. On motion of cruise line to dismiss or to transfer based on forum selection clauses, and motion of agents to dismiss, the District Court, 63 F.Supp.2d 1083, dismissed cruise line, based on forum selection clause in ticket specifying suit in Florida.

Passengers moved for reconsideration. The District Court, Henderson, J., held that: (1) extreme severity of passengers' handicaps, and their poverty, supported retention of jurisdiction, and (2) retention was supported on grounds that public policy favored encouragement of private actions to enforce ADA. Motion to dismiss denied.

Can Minors Avoid a Cruise Liner Forum Selection Clause Easier than an Adult?

Almost every case I could find about minors concluded that a minor child who was injured while a passenger on a cruise ship is bound by the passenger contract also. In Morrow v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 262 F.Supp.2d 474 (M.D.Pa.2002), at issue was the forum selection clause printed on the cruise ship ticket. Morrow relied on three cases, all of which involved forum selection clauses, rather than arbitration clauses. See Igneri v. Carnival Corp., 1996 WL 68536, ( E.D.N.Y.2002) (granting defendant's motion to transfer plaintiff's case from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida), Harden v. Am. Airlines, 178 F.R.D. 583, 585-86 (M.D.Ala.1998) (granting Defendant American Hawaii Cruises's motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue based on a forum selection clause which required that any lawsuit arising out of the cruise "must be brought and litigated, if at all, before a court located in the State of Hawaii, to the exclusion of the courts of any other country or located in any other state of the United States" (emphasis added)); Paster v. Putney Student Travel, Inc., 1999 WL 1074120, ( C.D.Cal.1999) (concluding that exclusive jurisdiction for the plaintiff's action against the defendant was in the courts of Vermont, rather than the United States District Court for the Central District of California).

Transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1406?

Section 1406(a) provides: "The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such a case to any district or division in which it could have been brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Under § 1406, a court may transfer a pending case to another state, or dismiss the action altogether. "Normally transfer will be in the interest of justice because normally dismissal of an action that could have been brought elsewhere is time-consuming and justice-defeating." Miller v. Hambrick, 905 F.2d 259, 262 (9th Cir.1990) (addressing transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1631).

Other Cases Where a Forum Selection Clause Was Held Unenforceable

The state courts in the following cases held that a forum selection clause in a cruise ticket was unenforceable, under the facts and circumstances presented.

In Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Superior Court, 234 Cal. App. 3d 1019, 286 Cal. Rptr. 323, 1992 A.M.C. 320 (2d Dist. 1991), an action by passengers on a cruise ship against the owners for injuries sustained during a storm at sea, the court held that the forum selection clause which provided that all disputes arising under or in connection with the ticket contract for passage on the cruise ship would be litigated in Florida courts, was unenforceable as to any particular plaintiff if the trial court, upon remand, determined that such a plaintiff did not have sufficient notice of the forum selection clause prior to entering into the contract for passage; absent such notice, the requisite mutual consent to that contractual term would be lacking and no valid contract with respect to such clause would exist.

The court in Casavant v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 63 Mass. App. Ct. 785, 829 N.E.2d 1171 (2005), in which prospective passengers for a vacation cruise brought an action against the cruise ship operator, relating to the operator's failure to honor their request to reschedule their ticket, based on safety concerns following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the trial court granted the operator's motion to dismiss, based on the contractual forum selection clause, and the plaintiffs appealed, held that the passengers did not impliedly accept the forum selection clause, and the forum selection clause was not enforceable under federal maritime law. The court held that the evidence did not establish that the prospective passengers impliedly accepted, as a binding contract, the terms and conditions of the vacation ticket, which included the forum selection clause, as the passengers made repeated requests to reschedule their ticket, in light of safety concerns following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

That court also held that the forum selection clause was not enforceable under federal maritime law, where the prospective passengers could not reject the forum selection clause with impunity. Because the manner and means of the delivery of the terms of the contract for passage did not fairly allow the passengers "the option of rejecting the contract with impunity," and because, in the limited time frame allotted, the passengers did not accept the ticket as a binding contract, under controlling federal maritime law and Massachusetts contractual law, the Florida-dictated forum selection clause was not enforceable, and the court held that a suit may therefore proceed in the Massachusetts courts.

In Cismaru v. Radisson Seven Seas Cruises, Inc., 2001 WL 6546 (Tex. App. Amarillo 2001), the court, reversing the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' negligence action against a cruise line pursuant to a forum selection clause in cruise tickets purchased by the plaintiffs, requiring suit to be brought in Broward County, Florida, held that the clause was unenforceable where the passengers first obtained notice of it upon receipt of their respective cruise tickets, and each passenger received his ticket at a time wherein he could not have canceled without incurring a penalty, and the clause was therefore, fundamentally unfair.

In Stobaugh v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., 5 S.W.3d 232, 2001 A.M.C. 215 (Tex. App. Houston 14th Dist. 1999), the court held, under federal maritime law, a forum selection clause, appearing in minuscule print on the back of a cruise line passenger ticket, requiring suit to be brought in Florida, offended notions of fair play and fundamental fairness, and thus was unenforceable against passengers in their personal injury action against the cruise line, where the 111-page promotional brochure sent to passengers did not contain the clause, the passengers did not receive the ticket until after they paid for the cruise in full, and they had no opportunity to reject the clause without a penalty at the time they received the ticket. The court noted, initially, that issues relating to the enforceability of a forum selection clause in a cruise line passenger ticket are issues of admiralty, and are therefore governed by federal maritime law, which preempts state law.

The court continued, under federal maritime law, forum selection clauses that are negotiated are generally enforceable. A forum selection clause that is not negotiated may be enforceable in some situations, the court said, but the clause must be fundamentally fair to the party against whom it is being enforced. The court, recognizing that the state has a significant interest in providing its citizens with a forum in which to resolve civil disputes, for purposes of forum selection clause analysis, concluded that parties who intend to deprive Texas citizens of the right to use their courts by way of a forum selection clause must give notice of that intention in an effective manner, and at a time that affords an opportunity to reject such a term without penalty, so as to comport with fundamental fairness.

In Pozero v. Alfa Travel, Inc., 856 S.W.2d 243 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1993), a suit by purchasers of cruise tickets and trip cancellation insurance under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. §§ 17.41 et seq. (DTPA), for alleged misrepresentations and failure to make disclosures, the court, reversing the trial court's dismissal for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue, held that the forum selection clause in the cruise ticket contract, requiring suit to be brought in San Francisco, California, did not apply to the purchasers' claims, which did not raise issues about the content of the contract or attempt to enforce or challenge rights emanating from the contract.

In Johnson v. Holland America Line-Westours, Inc., 206 Wis. 2d 562, 557 N.W.2d 475 (Ct. App. 1996), where cruise ship passengers who were forced to cancel their trip less than 15 days before departure requested a refund or credit of the ticket price of $9,806, the court, reversing the trial court's dismissal of the complaint based on the forum selection clause in the cruise ticket, held that the clause, set forth in fine print, requiring disputes to be litigated in Seattle, Washington, was unfair and unenforceable. The court, recognizing that a passenger ticket for an ocean voyage is a maritime contract whose interpretation and enforcement is governed by maritime law, explained that maritime law applies a two-prong test to determine the enforceability of a forum selection clause contained in a passenger ticket: the terms must be reasonably communicated to the passenger; and the forum selection clause must be fundamentally fair.

Reasonably Communicated Test

Under the "reasonably communicated" test for enforceability of a forum selection clause in a passenger ticket, the court must determine whether the contract reasonably communicated to the passenger the existence of important terms and conditions that affected the legal rights of the passenger. Reasonable notice, the court explained, is a question of law, and the court must examine circumstances surrounding the purchase of the ticket, the purchaser's familiarity with the ticket and the incentive to study the provisions and notices received. In the instant case, the court found, the forum selection clause was unfair and unenforceable where the passengers received the ticket less than 45 days before departure, and under the plain terms of the ticket, the passengers would have had to forfeit one-half of the entire purchase price of $9,806 if they had rejected the contract and canceled the trip on receipt of the ticket.

State trial court's conclusion that forum selection clause in cruise ship ticket contract was not reasonably communicated to passengers, so that clause was not enforceable under federal admiralty law, was not against manifest weight of evidence; passengers testified they never received ticket booklet containing bus and cruise tickets, passengers were unable to provide bus and cruise tickets to ship owner's representatives, and perforated sheet that passengers signed dockside when they were unable to provide bus and cruise tickets was not attached to a larger document containing forum selection clause. Mack v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 297 Ill. Dec. 593, 838 N.E.2d 80 (App. Ct. 1st Dist. 2005).

CONCLUSION

If a minor is involved you can try and argue that your state, such as California ("CA"), has a special state interest in protecting its own children and fundamental fairness dictates the minor litigate his/her case here in CA based upon the above cases. In all events, assuming it is a Carnival lawsuit, you would still need present compelling evidence that Florida law provides less protection than CA law if arguing state interest in protecting a minor. (Gagnon v. Ryerson, Inc., No. 07-68-AS, Slip Op. at 4. ( D.Or.Fed.1, 2007).

And remember that under Harden v. American Airlines, 178 F.R.D. 583, 587 (M.D.Ala.1998), a minor may not void a contract to escape the forum selection clause contained therein if the minor has already accepted the benefits under the contract); Holland v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., 270 Cal.App.2d 417, 421, 75 Cal.Rptr. 669, 671 (1969) (asserting that minors choosing to disaffirm a contract must "disaffirm the entire contract, not just the irksome portions").

Assuming a minor child was raped on a cruise liner for example, the question becomes, is a minor being raped is an acceptance of a benefit, or a misrepresentation of safety? If fraud then you have a basis to void the clause. Where do I file my cruise line accident case will depend upon whether or not you can void the forum selection clause and file a cruise ship case in a state other than the one your passage contract that is more convenient to your or the injured victim trying to recover damages like medical bills, psychological bills and physical and mental pain and suffering damages.

Los Angeles personal injury attorneys are constantly educating the public on Cruise Line Lawsuits and are highly proficient in recovering money for injured victims in cities like Culver City, Marina del Rey and Venice Beach. Visit our cruise ship lawsuit attorneys in Los Angeles to learn more about Princess and Carnival Cruise Liner accidents and lawsuits.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_Ehline
http://EzineArticles.com/?Where-Do-I-File-My-Cruise-Line-Accident-Case----Can-I-Sue-in-a-State-Other-Than-My-Passenger-Ticket?&id=819042

What Attorneys Sue Crown Princess Cruise Lines?

What attorneys sue Crown Princess cruise lines is an often asked question when you live in a state other than California and are now stuck by contract with suing in Los Angeles, California. Were you or someone you love injured while aboard a Crown Princess cruise ship, or other cruise liner? If so, it is likely you will need to retain a Los Angeles, California cruise ship injury lawyer (Plaintiff's lawyers) to assist you in accordance with your boarding passenger ticket. Only a Los Angeles court can assist you, so it makes sense to get a California attorney to help you when you've been injured while on a ship out at sea.

No matter where or how you were injured while aboard, whether it is a rape, sexual assault, physical battery slip and fall or security guard abuse, even if your cruise liner is responsible for you being injured ashore on an pre-arranged excursion, experienced cruise ship injury attorneys probably will be able to help you. But hark, there is usually a time limit on your passenger contract that limits when and where you can sue for a cruise ship injury. Normally there is a cruise line wide policy and contractual duty for you notify the cruise ship in a way spelled out in your contract. Usually you must follow this contract to the letter and serve your written claim upon the cruise lines within six months of your injury.

Legal consultations with excellent attorneys are normally free and you won’t be billed any fees or costs unless there is a legal victory. Many people out of state give up their case because they can’t find a California cruise line attorney to help out! But there are a few California firm, such as Los Angeles Cruise Line Negligence Attorneys who help out of state claimants for cruise ship injury cases.

The following are just a few examples of cruise vacation that can occur both on and off cruise ships and other boats:


* Rape;
* Trip and fall;
* Assaulted by cruise line crew member;
* Molestation of a child by a crew member;
* Gang bang rape by cruise ship employees;
* Food poisoning resulting in norovirus and wrongful death;
* Alcohol related drowning at sea;
* Severe brain injuries.


As a passenger on board a cruiseliner who suffered injuries, cruise ship injury lawyers should be able to obtain money for you for hospital bills, physical and mental pain and suffering, lost wages, loss of future earning capacity and many other things like nursing care for your catastrophic injuries at sea.

There are many other factor to consider as well. The situs, or location where your injury took place is also important these types of claims involving injuries on a pleasure cruise . Assuming your injuries on the cruise ship happened while still inside United States waters, or the territorial jurisdiction of the state waters like Georgia, or California, for example, state or federal law will likely be the law of the case. But if your injuries on a pleasure liner took place more than three miles from the shoreline, admiralty maritime law will rule the case unless excepted by contract.

This means you may be forced to use the less fair and more cruise liner corporation friendly law of the sea to establish damages and liability in the prove up of your claims. If is killed on a cruise ship or dies from norovirus or some other tropical disease, you may have a survival claim or wrongful death claim suit against the shipping company. But again, if a death at sea happens three miles or more from the sea shore, the stricter Death On The High Seas Act (DOHSA) is the prevailing law! This means unless you have experience in both admiralty law and California and federal law, you will have a daunting task in litigation a case against Crown Princess Cruises.

If you or your loved ones suffered serious injuries at sea on a Princess Cruise Ship, or died from negligence or even intentional acts. What attorneys sue Crown Princess cruise lines can be contacted immediately by telephone or e-mail. Speak with an experienced Princess Cruise Ship Lawyer at 888-400-9721. Don’t delay.

Cruise Liner Crashes Into Freighter Cargo Ship

Montevideo, Uruguay, December 10, 2007 - A cruise liner crashed into a freighter in Montevideo's harbor. This caused part of the freighter cargo to be tossed overboard and closed down the port, according to local sources.

Initial reports indicated that none of the 229 passengers aboard the the cruise ship, Norwegian Dreams 2, suffered injuries. It is also believed no one on board the freighter ship were hurt either. The Uruguayan internet newspaper Espectador came out with this info and said they got it from the Uruguay Navy.

Both ships were damaged. The cargo freighter is believed to have lost five of its cargo containers and a few motor vehicles it was shipping.

The cruise ship accident off shore from Uruguay's capital occurred just two short weeks after cruise liner MV Explorer sank after striking an iceberg on a sightseeing trip to the Antarctic.

When Your Cruise Ship Dream Vacation Becomes a Stormy Nightmare You Will See Why You Need Cruise Ship Injury Lawyers

You thought it was gonna be the celebratory Crown Princess travel vacation of your life. You had believed it would create great long life memories and make great photos for your mantle and walls. You were terribly wrong. Yes, your planned and anxiously awaited cruise vacation was unforgettable.

When your cruise ship dream vacation becomes a stormy nightmare you will see why you need cruise ship injury lawyers. But the memories became a nightmare. Mishaps while aboard a cruise liner are usually much worse that those on U.S. soil. You can very often feel frightened and isolated. This can really take the proverbial wind out of your sails. When you are out at sea and injured, you may not know your legal rights, or if you have any at all. Experienced ship accident lawyers are necessary to protect your contractual rights, as well as your legal rights and will help you understand how to recover damages for your traumatic experiences and help you to achieve maximum monetary compensation.

Cruise Ships Are a Great Source of Dangers to You and Your Family

It is important for you to know that often in the past, cruise lines have put profits over people. They are probably still not always looking out for your best interests, despite the negative press and media reports about murders, rapes and noro virus at sea. Yes they have become popular and notorious all at about the same time over the years. With many retiring, the dangers of cruise ships are expected to rise with increased vacations and travels around the waterways.

It is well known that the cruise ship industry has concealed bad sanitation on vessels at sea and the fact that often they have had poor security and little if any proper safety precautions. It is known that cruise ship companies have hired unqualified low lifes from third world countries who have zero respect for the rule of law we in the U.S. have accepted as normal. They often hire people from countries like Somalia, or Ethiopia who have totally different cultures or zero understanding of our concept of right and wrong, who have little education or training at all.

Some of these individuals have little or no moral character and have even plead guilty to rape of passengers of the cruise ships they work on, including sodomy of little minor boys. These unregulated hiring practices are often coupled with poor maintenance and horrible management practices.

There have been many noteworthy superior court lawsuits resulting from these less than adequate business practices. You may recall the Carnival Cruise ship case where that company was actually convicted of dumping tons of raw human waste at sea against the laws. Although media attention is helping to force the cruise lines to square themselves away, international laws are pretty weak and the small print on many passenger tickets practically requires an attorney to understand it. This leaves many injured individuals with no idea how to protect their legal rights when injured or wounded at sea on a passenger vessel.

How Do You Stay Safe if You are Actually Crazy Enough to Take a Cruise to Begin With?

If you will be leaving a U.S. Port on a cruise ship vacation in the near future, you must understand that accidents are bound to occur at sea. You must dutifully research the cruise line you are considering and learn a little bit about the ship’s captain and crew before you steam away into the deep blue sea. This is the first step in improving your chances of survival and safety while on a cruise vacation. You can go online and view consumer reports about particular cruises. You should educate your self and look at what other previous passengers or critics have to say as part of your investigation of the credentials of the company. You also need to see what the medical training of the medical crew aboard the ship has as well. The last thing you want is a doctor who is not even qualified by U.S. standards to be working on you or your wife’s injury at sea. This could be a ticket to a medical malpractice lawsuit. When your cruise ship dream vacation becomes a stormy nightmare you will see why you need cruise ship injury lawyers and below tells you the many reasons why you will want a cruise line vacation lawyer.

What Types of Injuries Happen Most Often on Cruise Ships?

Some of the Most Common Ship Board Injuries Include:

• Trips on Unsafe Steps and Decks


• Severe Injuries While Ashore On a Ship Sponsored Excursion


• Rape or Attacks by Crew Members or Dangerous and Violent Passengers on Ships


• Deadly food poisoning


• Injuries from fires, explosions, lack of security, or mechanical defects

What Should I Do If I Was Hurt on a Cruise Ship?

The first thing you need to do is re read the passage contract. It contains your rights, duties and obligations as to you and the cruise liner you hired. The passenger ticket will advise you where and when any potential lawsuits against and cruise ship can be brought. Sometimes, cruise ship accidents are only allowed to be brought in the state where the port or departure is located. Princess cruises require their lawsuits to be brought in Los Angeles, California. In addition, there is often a shorter period of time in which you can bring a lawsuit and a procedure that must be followed before you are allowed to file a court lawsuit.

A cruise ship accident attorney should be able to assist you in swimming through the fine print on the passage contract. You should retain a team of highly professional lawyers who can investigate the claims and who can afford to hire professional experts and investigators. Getting a group of legal professionals will help mitigate your horrific experience at sea. If you were injured at sea, you need to contact an experienced cruise ship lawsuit lawyer now to start the process. Our personal injury lawyers Los Angeles are standing by. (888) 400-9721