"Leesfield & Partners"

Published on: July 19, 2024

As summer ends, thousands of families will flock to PortMiami for cruises. Here’s what to know if you are injured

With the dwindling days of summer vacation and the promise of back-to-school sales and homework assignments on the horizon, families all over the United States will head to South Florida in droves for last-minute summer getaways. The area has plenty to offer that attracts millions of tourists every year from the famed beauty and history of the Florida Keys to the opportunity to observe wildlife in the Everglades. Many families, however, will head straight to PortMiami, the cruise capital of the world, to board one of many cruise lines that frequent the area.

PortMiami saw 7.3 million people pass through it in 2023 as the cruise line industry continued to gain back its footing after the pandemic. With increased traffic to the area as this boon in the industry continues comes the rise in the possibility of injuries.

With a home base in Miami, Florida, Leesfield & Partners has had the unique opportunity of watching cruise ships compete with one another over the years to become “floating cities” and sea-bound theme parks. Today, more and more ships are equipped with winding slides, slippery water parks and onboard attractions that can sometimes lead to catastrophic injury when the right precautions are not taken. When the latter takes place, Leesfield & Partners has been there to support injured clients and grieving families. The extensive experience of Leesfield & Partners attorneys attained over its 48 years representing clients is to the benefit of an injured person seeking our legal counsel.

Published on: July 16, 2024

Man’s family awarded $2 million in lawsuit after he died from burn at Kentucky motel. What do places like hotels and cruise ships owe customers?

By Leesfield & Partners

The family of a 76-year-old Kentucky man was awarded over $2 million this month after his death from a burning incident in a motel shower, according to news outlets.

The incident happened in 2021 while the man was on a business trip. When he got in the shower, hot water estimated in the lawsuit to be 150 degrees Fahrenheit scalded him. The man fell and was unable to get up until coworkers who heard him screaming rushed into the bathroom to help. The man had third-degree burns following the incident and died seven months later after spending most of his time in and out of hospitals. Third-degree burns affect the deeper layers of the skin and burn down to the fatty tissue. They require immediate medical attention.

The lawsuit filed on behalf of the grieving family did not specify what caused the water to come out at 150 degrees. A judgment filed earlier this month stated that the hotel failed to properly inspect and maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition.

Published on: June 24, 2024

Water parks and cruise lines see dollar signs, not people. How these industries leave patrons vulnerable to injury

By Leesfield & Partners

A woman sues SeaWorld after being injured at its Aquatica water park on a slide last year when another patron “violently colliding” with her.

The woman was visiting SeaWorld’s Aquatica in Orlando when she said she went on a slide that had no lifeguard stationed outside of it to monitor when patrons had safely gone down the slide and give permission for the next person to go. Before the woman got off her water slide, another adult guest got on and “violently colliding” with her, causing her permanent injury, her attorneys said in the lawsuit.

This story is, unfortunately, not unique. A 7-year-old at Jungle Island in Miami visiting the park with his summer camp was luckily saved by a lifeguard who saw the child, not wearing a life vest, struggling in the water. The lifeguard performed CPR on the child who had to be taken to the hospital where he went into cardiac arrest but, thankfully, came out of the ordeal safely, according to previous reporting of the incident.

Published on: June 19, 2024

Cruise ships set to plug into power in Port Miami, attracting more ships to the area. Leesfield & Partners suspects a major problem

By Leesfield & Partners

Cruise ships at Port Miami will be able to plug into the county’s power grid – a move that officials say will boost the local economy by attracting more cruise lines to the area while cutting down on pollution.

There’s just one problem. More ships means an increase in the possibility of cruise ship injuries, a practice area that Leesfield & Partners knows all too well.

The decision was spurred by sustainability efforts from Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava who told reporters in an article published in The Miami Herald that the project would bring the county that much closer to cutting down on its carbon emissions.

Published on: May 31, 2024

Georgia woman tells news outlets how Carnival Cruise Ship left her stranded and sedated in Dominican Republic hospital with no way of getting home

By Leesfield & Partners

Basking in the sun or heading to a cholesterol-raising buffet for the fourth time in a single morning, no one thinks about the dangers aboard cruise ships. Statistics show, however, that cruises are riddled with all kinds of hazards. From sexual assaults to falls resulting in broken bones or requiring surgery, Leesfield & Partners has represented just about every injury aboard these massive holiday vessels.

When stories are spread in the media about cruise medical care and its often devastating consequences, Leesfield & Partners attorneys know that it is unfortunately not all that uncommon. Some people simply do not receive the care they require while others are left to suffer from illnesses or injuries because a cruise doctor refuses to evacuate them. In some cases, cruise ships will abandon a sick passenger in a foreign country to continue on its journey with the other passengers. This is much like the case of an elderly passenger represented by the law firm who suffered a hemorrhagic stroke. This type of stroke, according to the National Institute of Health, is a bleeding in the brain caused by a ruptured blood vessel. The passenger was able to disembark from the ship in the Bahamas for emergency transfer back to Broward County, Florida. The cruise line never verified that the airport would be open and the woman was left to wait at the closed airport where she died waiting to be transferred.

Fortunately for a grandmother heading to the Bahamas on a Carnival Cruise Ship, the outcome was very different.

Published on: December 2, 2021

Was your Jones Act case improperly removed?

By Leesfield & Partners

On November 15, 2021, Federal District Judge Kenneth A. Marra remanded an injured maritime crewmember’s case from the Southern District of Florida back to Florida’s Fifteenth Judicial Circuit court, granting Zan Lang’s motion to remand his Jones Act negligence claims. Leesfield & Partners has the honor of representing the injured seaman in the case styled Zan Lang v. Allen Exploration and 6161 LLC, Case No.: 21-81813-CIV-MARRA. The Jones Act case was originally filed in Florida State Court in West Palm Beach. Shortly thereafter, the Defendants improperly removed the crewmember Jones Act case to federal court in the Southern District of Florida. A motion to remand the Jones Act claims was filed, contesting Defendants’ removal of the case.

As alleged in the Complaint, Zan Lang was working as a crewmember onboard the M/Y Gigi and M/Y Axis, vessels owned and operated by Allen Exploration, during the time he was subjected to dangerous and unsafe conditions, overworked without the proper equipment, and caused to suffer serious injuries. Allen Exploration, an American company, owns a fleet of vessels and operates a maritime treasure hunting operation. As detailed in the Complaint, the U.S. home base for Allen Exploration is Rybovich Marina, located in West Palm Beach, Florida. Crewmember Zan Lang worked for Allen Exploration for several months on land in West Palm Beach, Florida, before the underlying voyage began. Despite the clear connection to Florida, Defendants attempted to remove the Jones Act action to federal court, claiming that Jamaican law should apply and the case should be dismissed. Removal is the legal process of transferring a lawsuit filed in state court to the United States District Court. To be entitled to removal Defendant must set forth a valid legal basis. After removal a Plaintiff can seek to have the case transferred back to state court through a legal process known as remand. Special rules and law for removal apply to maritime actions and crewmember Jones Act claims.

The order granting remand of Zan Lang’s Jones Act case flatly rejects Defendants legal arguments for removal and having the case heard in federal court, and establishes favorable law for crewmember plaintiffs who are hurt or injured and desire to bring a Jones Act claim against their maritime employer. As a general legal matter, Jones Act claims cannot be removed to federal court. Lewis v. Lewis & Clark, 531 U.S. 438, 455 (2001). However, in Zan Lang’s case the defense attempted to argue that United States law should not apply to his claim, that he has no possibility of establishing a Jones Act claim on the merits, and the prohibition against removal of a Jones Act claim to federal court should therefore not apply. The court also rejected the Defendants’ position that Zan Lang had an obligation to present affirmative evidence to establish the application of U.S. law at the remand stage, and rejected the application of a summary judgment style approach to resolution utilized in the federal Fifth Circuit, calling into question the holding in Lackey v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 990 F.2d 202 (5th Cir. 1993). The court ruled that Zan Lang’s election to file his Jones Act lawsuit in West Palm Beach was legally proper, and that Defendants had failed to establish a legal basis to remove his Jones Act maritime negligence claim.

Published on: October 15, 2013

“It is reasonable to put a lifeguard around the pools of Cruise Ships” tells Maritime Lawyer Carol Finklehoffe to CBS This Morning

By Leesfield & Partners

On CBS This Morning, Leesfield & Partners Maritime Law Attorney Carol Finklehoffe said that if Cruise Lines have deck attendants selling drinks and employees watching over the water slides, it is reasonable to have lifeguards around the pools as well:

This latest tragedy has placed Carnival Cruise Lines back in the spotlight. The loss of Qwentyn Hunter in one of the Carnival Victory’s pools prompts many to question whether conspicuous signage that there are “no lifeguards on duty” is realistically enough to fulfill the cruise line’s duty of care to provide a safe and proper place to bathe or swim.

Published on: May 10, 2013

Injured on a cruise ship? You need a cruise ship injury lawyer!

By Leesfield & Partners

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

Published on: April 16, 2013

Navigating the Obstacles Created by Cruise Lines in Shore Excursion Tragedies

By Leesfield & Partners

Article written by Robert D. Peltz and Carol L. Finklehoffe of Leesfield & Partners 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 • 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

Published on: February 26, 2013

Media storm necessary in shedding light on glaring shortcomings of Cruise safety?

By Leesfield & Partners

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.”