ARTICLE ID 168857
$________ GROSS - JONES ACT - FAILURE TO SECURE LUGGAGE ABOARD CRUISE SHIP - PLAINTIFF STRUCK IN KNEE BY LUGGAGE - FAILURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE - KNEE SURGERY FOLLOWED BY TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT.
Miami-Dade County, FL
The plaintiff was a 44-year-old female cabin steward on
board the defendant Royal Caribbeans cruise ship when she
claimed she was struck in the knee by a piece of heavy luggage.
The plaintiff alleged, under the Federal Jones Act, that the
defendant was negligent and allowed an unseaworthy condition in
the form of unsecured luggage. The plaintiff also alleged that
she did not receive prompt, proper and adequate medical care and
treatment for her injury. As a result, the plaintiff claimed that
she underwent an unsuccessful knee surgery and ultimately
unnecessary knee replacement surgery. The defendant questioned
how the plaintiffs knee injury occurred and argued that she
received prompt and appropriate medical treatment.
The plaintiff was working aboard the defendants Rhapsody of the
Seas in May of ________. She testified that she was reaching up to
retrieve a passengers suitcase which was stacked very high when
the heavy suitcase fell down and struck her in the knee. The
plaintiff alleged that the defendant negligently failed to secure
the luggage in a safe manner.
The plaintiff testified that she initially believed her knee pain
would resolve and she waited approximately six months before
reporting the incident to the defendant. The defendant sent the
plaintiff to an orthopedic surgeon in Cozumel, Mexico, and she
was diagnosed with chondromalacia of the knee. The plaintiffs
medical experts opined that the Mexican doctor negligently
cleared the plaintiff to return to work with pain medication,
which worsened her knee condition.
In June of ________, the plaintiff was assigned to the defendants
ship, Freedom of the Seas. She complained of continuing knee pain
and was sent by the defendant to a physician in her home country
of Nicaragua where she was diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the
knee.
The plaintiffs medical experts opined that the Nicaraguan doctor
also rendered substandard care to the plaintiff in performing two
knee surgeries in ________. The plaintiffs expert orthopedic surgeon
utilized a videotape of the plaintiffs first surgery to argue
that the procedure was improperly performed. The second surgery,
a total knee replacement, was not necessary, according to the
plaintiffs expert.
The plaintiff claimed that she continues to suffer ongoing knee
pain and is unable to continue her former employment as a ships
steward.
The defendant argued that the alleged incident was unwitnessed,
the plaintiff did not report it for some six months and she could
not establish how her knee injury actually occurred. The defense
claimed that the plaintiff had signed a statement indicating that
she had sustained the knee injury years before the luggage
allegedly fell on her.
The defendants orthopedic surgeon testified that the video of
the plaintiffs first surgery demonstrated that the surgery was
performed within the applicable standard of care in all respects.
In addition, the defense expert opined that the plaintiffs knee
replacement surgery was indicated and properly performed.
The defendants expert also opined that the plaintiff suffered
from osteoarthritis which was degenerative in nature and not
causally-related to trauma. The defendant maintained that it
provided appropriate medical care for the plaintiffs complaints
and that she was properly treated for her knee condition. The
defense also argued that the plaintiff can walk without a cane,
crutches or other assistance and has good strength and full range
of motion in the knee.
The jury found negligence under the Jones Act, unseaworthiness
and failure to provide prompt, proper and adequate medical care
and treatment. The jury assessed the defendant 73% negligent and
the plaintiff 27% comparatively negligent. The plaintiff was
awarded $________ in damages, reduced to a net award or
$________. The defendants post-trial motions are pending.
5 ways to win with JVRA
JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:
- Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
- Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
- Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
- Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
- Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.
Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.