Last Friday, the day the Carnival Triumph passengers were finally going home from the "cruise from hell," the first two lawsuits were filed.

The first case mentioned in the press was filed by a Texas lawyer representing a woman from Brazoria County Texas. I printed a copy from the court’s online docket to read this weekend. The lawsuit alleges that the passenger was forced to "endure unbearable and horrendous odors on the filthy and disabled" cruise ship.  Because of the "sweltering temperatures, lack of power and air conditioning, lack of running water, and lack of toilets," the woman "feared for her life" and was threatened with Carnival Triumph Cruise Ship Fire"contracting serious illness by the raw sewage" filling the ship. 

The problem with allegations like these is that they are excluded by the terms and conditions of the ticket issued by the cruise line.

Experiencing psychological distress or being afraid of getting sick are not a basis for a lawsuit unless there is a physical injury or actual physical illness.

The lady’s lawyer later told the press that his client had a fever and felt nauseous, but notably lacking from the lawsuit or the lawyer’s comments were any mention of an actual illness diagnosed by a doctor.  This may be explained by the fact that the woman probably had not been to a doctor yet.        

The other lawsuit was filed on behalf of another Texan passenger by a lawyer here in Miami. As described by USA Today’s Cruise Log, the lawsuit alleges that the 42 year old passenger suffered severe dehydration and bruising from aggressive food lines on the crippled ship. Her lawyer said she was so ill from the five-day ordeal that she had to be given intravenous fluids in an emergency room when she returned home to Houston. Severe dehydration may be sufficient to meet the physical injury requirements of the law but it is unknown whether this is just a temporary injury.

I have made my thoughts of litigation in cases like this well know.

Following the last "cruise from hell" engine room fire disaster in 2010 when the Carnival Splendor was stranded off the coast of Mexico and had to be towed back to the U.S., I wrote an article "Three Reasons Why You Will Lose If You Sue Carnival."  The same conclusions I reached two years ago apply to this latest Carnival debacle. 

It’s not that I am unsympathetic to the people’s plight. But I have represented clients who waved goodbye to family members at the dock and their loved ones either didn’t return from the cruise or they returned in a body bag.   

If you are on a cruise ship that catches on fire on the high seas and you return with your family physically uninjured, count your blessings.

Cruise passengers returning from the Triumph need to rest, relax and start trying to recover from the stress.  They should go to a doctor and be checked out. Get your blood tested if you are afraid.  Send the medical bills to Carnival to Carnival to be reimbursed. But filing a lawsuit before going to a doctor puts the cart ahead of the horse. 

Let’s hope that no one develops a truly serious and permanent illness from sloshing around in sewage for a week. If the feces and urine cause an innocent passenger to contract hepatitis or Legionnaires Disease or some other debilitating or deadly illness, then the afflicted passenger should sue the hell out of Carnival.

But inconvenience, aggravation, anger and being afraid of disease won’t get you very far in a federal courtroom here in Miami.

Update: Triumph Fire:  Here Comes the Lawsuits! (Part 2): Miami Firm Files Class Action Lawsuit!


Photo Credit: Fox40

  • Rob Alfonso

    I understand your stance, and you are 100% correct, however, its totally un-fare that customers are forced to agree to these terms at all. They have no choice but to accept the terms or don’t go at all. Is that a Democratic principal in this country? I don’t think so. Someone needs to spend the time and challenge these carriage contracts and make them more customer friendly. I have little doubt that if someone challenged these contracts the courts would strike portions down to be re-written to make them enforceable. I admit I am not a lawyer (as you know) but I took the time to read the contract after Concordia and if I remember correctly Carnival literally indemnified themselves from many situations that clearly the passenger would expect the carrier to safely deliver them in. This is a one sided affair to be sure. What is now off limits to damages could be attainable if a challenge is mounted. Now should every headache warrant punitive damages, no way! But there are valid concerns that should be considered that are currently not allowed due to the one sided contracts people sign when taking a cruise.

  • lyz c

    I was on the Triumph. There is no reason for a passenger to be dehydrated. Free water was available at every bar. If this person was unable to get her own water, her fellow passengers would have gotten it for her. Additionally, while the lines were long there was no pushing and shoving so I can’t imagine she was bruised from standing in line.

  • Kim

    I completely agree with not suing based on the conditions after the fire. My husband and I were there and while it was inconvenient and smelly, it wasn’t as bad as some people seem to think. However, (and I am not knowledgeable about law or lawsuits) what of the fact that the ship had problems twice in the previous months? I was told by a crew member that a large number of the crew refused to get back on after the fire a couple weeks ago and Carnival had to hire or rearrange crew to cover the ship. I realize this is just the word of crew told to me…but if I had known the ship had problems, I would have never sailed on it.