Ah, it seems that court opinions are becoming more and more .... spicy.
Now now, don't get too excited, this is a law blog after all.
The Eleventh Circuit just ruled on a interlocutory decision regarding a limitation of liability provision of a cruise ship ticket-contract. The case is Wajnstat v. Oceania Cruises, Inc. and it can be found here.
Facts are straightforward. A cruise ship passenger on a voyage from Istanbul (not Constantinople) to Athens became ill and was evacuated to the Ukraine where he underwent three surgeries and allegedly received substandard care. The passenger brought his claims for negligence (of the ship's doctor) in federal court in Fort Lauderdale (Note: cruisers- read your ticket carefully) per the ticket forum selection clause. The cruise ship company asserted a limitation of liability defense based on the ticket-contract.
The trial court went through the limitation of liability provision and found that it was unenforceable because the provision required the passenger "to parse through the treaties and the statutes to determine the limits of Oceania’s liability."
The court did not address the merits of the appeal but rather raised its jurisdiction to even hear the appeal. Generally, parties may only appeal the "final" decision of a trial court and not any interlocutory ones. The court's decision, in this case, was interlocutory and therefore, not appealable.
The cruise ship argued that if it is ultimately NOT liable to the plaintiff, it won't have the ability to appeal the court's decision on the limitation of liability provision. In the court's words:
Even though no court, including the issuing court will be bound by the ruling, Oceania fears that the very existence of the ruling will persuade other courts to follow it.
But so what?
If another court does follow the ruling and Oceania suffers a non-limited award of damages in some future case, it can appeal that judgment and argue the issue on appeal.
Comments