HM&B Prevails on Appeal Before the Eleventh Court of Appeals

Adams v. Paradise Cruise Line Operator Ltd., Inc., No. 20-12861 (11th Cir. Feb. 16, 2021).

Marilyn Adams and her husband were passengers aboard the Grand Celebration, a cruise ship owned and operated by Paradise Cruise Line Operators, Ltd., Inc. After Adams entered her stateroom, she took a shower, where the entrance to the bathroom contained a “slippery when wet” sign. Ms. Adams placed a towel on the floor outside the shower. After she finished her shower, because of the steaminess, Adams could not see where she was stepping. She did not dry off, and when she stepped out, she slipped on a pool of water on the bathroom floor. Ms. Adams’ husband claimed the water was deep enough that her towel on the floor was “floating” on the water. Then Adams went to the ship’s medical center for treatment. After returning to her stateroom, her husband noticed “rot” and “rust” on the bathroom door frame near the shower. Ms. Adams’ husband took a picture of the area, but neither Adams nor her husband ran the shower after the incident to find where the water was allegedly leaking from. 

Ms. Adams sued Paradise for negligence and alleged the “flooded bathroom floor was due to rotted baseboards in the shower, causing the shower to leak into the bathroom.” She claimed Paradise failed: (1) to maintain a bathroom free from dangerous conditions, (2) to inspect the bathroom for dangerous conditions and timely correct the same, and (3) to warn of the dangerous condition. Paradise moved for summary judgment, and the court granted the motion. Ms. Adams appealed.

The appellate court concluded Adams presented no evidence the rust spot on the bathroom doorframe caused the water on the floor. Ms. Adams did not check to see if the rust spot was ever the cause. Further, Adams failed to rebut the evidence that Paradise’s expert submitted about the water not coming from the alleged corroded area in the shower. The court concluded that Adams made bare, unsatisfactory allegations about a leak from the rust in the bathroom, and that is not enough to defeat a motion for summary judgment. 

The appellate court also noted that Paradise had no duty to warn of “excessive pooling” outside of the shower because it did not have notice of the alleged dangerous condition. The court reasoned that (1) Adams was not in a public area when she fell; (2) she did not allege there was water on the floor before her shower that any crew members could have seen; and (3) Paradise did not have a corrective policy in place that any crew members failed to follow. 

Further, the court concluded that the “slippery when wet” warning sign was not a warning of excessive pooling and that sign cannot create an inference of actual or constructive notice. 

Finally, the court concluded Adams’ evidence of an online posting of a previous passenger was not enough to show a substantially similar accident to put Paradise on notice. For all of those reasons, the appellate court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Paradise. The case was led by HM&B partner Michael J. Dono, of counsel William F. Clair, and associate Annalisa Gutierrez.