Plaintiff also points to several slip and fall incidents on the Lido Deck of the Magic and Breeze vessels that he proffers as “pecific evidence of notice” (Id. due to the length of time the wet, slippery condition had been present before the Plaintiff slipped on it and fell the Defendant’s inspection schedule and cleaning policies for the floor surface in question the recurring nature of the condition prior similar incidents the high traffic nature of the Lido Deck or otherwise. In each Count, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant had actual and/or constructive notice of the dangerous condition on the Lido Deck floor. 23-21499-CIV-ALTONAGA/Damian Plaintiff brings claims against Defendant for negligent maintenance (Count I) and negligent failure to warn of hazard (Count II). Plaintiff estimates “hese damages are permanent or continuing in their nature and the Plaintiff will continue to sustain and incur these damages in the future.” (Id. Because of the fall, Plaintiff also incurred medical and health care expenses and “lost wages and a loss of future earning capacity.” (Id.). mental anguish, disfigurement, disability, aggravation or acceleration of preexisting conditions, and the inability to lead a normal life.” (Id. The fall caused Plaintiff “injuries including injuries to his knee and quadricep” that resulted in “pain. BACKGROUND Plaintiff was a passenger aboard the Carnival cruise ship Magic on May 7, 2022, when he “slipped on a wet or slippery transient foreign substance” while on the ship’s “Lido deck near the pool” (Compl. For the following reasons, the Motion is granted in part. The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s Complaint, the parties’ written submissions, and applicable law. Plaintiff, Lamar Fawcett, filed a Response, to which Defendant filed a Reply. _/ ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant, Carnival Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, filed on May 24, 2023. 23-21499-CIV-ALTONAGA/Damian LAMAR FAWCETT, Plaintiff, v. 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.
0 kommentar(er)
