Federal Judiciary

The "Fun Ships" of Carnival - With Industry Standard One-Year Limitations Provisions!

By Michael Smith

Marrinan v. Carnival Corp., 2008 WL 728202(E.D.Tex. Mar 17, 2008) (NO. 6:06-CV-294) Judge: Michael Schneider
Holding: Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED.
Plaintiff and his wife took a Carnival cruise for their 25th anniversary. Their cruise contract contained a one-year statute of limitations and a forum selection clause requiring suit to be filed in Florida. Five days after boarding, plaintiff was injured aboard the ship when the side window of Plaintiff's cabin came loose and hit him on the head. Plaintiff filed suit in Texas state court not quite two years after the injury.
At the beginning of this case Judge Schneider denied a motion to dismiss based on these clauses. He held that the issue could only be considered in a motion for summary judgment, because the alleged failure to comply with the limitation period did not appear on the face of the complaint, and both parties submitted evidence outside of the pleadings, including the tickets, brochures, and affidavits. The Court also denied Carnival's motion to transfer, holding that because Plaintiff could not have cancelled his ticket with impunity, the forum selection clause was fundamentally unfair. Finally, the Court held that Section 1404(a) allows for transfer, not dismissal, and denied Carnival's motion to dismiss based on improper venue.
Now on summary judgment, Judge Schneider granted the motion for summary judgment based on the one-year limitations provision. Although the evidence was not clear whether the provision was available prior to the accident, it was clear that it was for the year subsequent to the accident. The court rejected the plaintiff's claim that the provision was fundamentally unfair, or that equitable estoppel principles prevented its application.

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on March 24, 2008 (boomark / email).