Travel Law News

There is an endless amount of families, individuals, and business people who spend millions of dollars on cruise ship vacations every single year. Lets face it, it is one of the most fun and exciting ways for a person to spend some relaxing time soaking up the suns rays. Most of the cruise ships today even have several different fun and exciting activities planned out that the entire family is able to take advantage of. What more could you ask for, after all you are away from the hustle and bustle of your normal busy schedule. Another benefit is the fact that while your family is on these ships you do not have to worry about the constant danger and assaults that are taking place back on land…right? Wrong!

Having a ton of fun in the sun should not mean rape while you are out at sea, but unfortunately this is exactly what it does end up meaning for some passengers that are simply trying to take a break from reality and enjoy the peacefulness of a family vacation. It is actually impossible to keep assaults such as rapes from happening no matter where you may be at the time, and this certainly includes taking a ride on a ship headed to various areas of the ocean.

When this is the type of traumatic assault that one of your family members or even yourself have faced you need to know that there are compassionate and knowledgeable cruise ship rape attorneys that are available to help. They have a vast amount of experience in being able to handle all types of rape assaults at sea that are most common in happening on cruises and they have the know how to give you the assurance that you need in knowing that justice will prevail.

This can be a very hard and devastating time for your entire family and it can be very important to let professional cruise shit rape attorneys help you handle all of the frustrating and often hard to understand legalities. They will make every effort into reviewing every aspect of the assault and then studying your case in its entirety so they can direct you to the best action that should be taken.

Fun in the sun should not mean that you have to endure a rape at sea. When this is the type of situation that kicked you in the face, these experienced attorneys can also help direct you to the most qualified and experienced counselors that are so often needed when this type of traumatic event occurs.

If you were raped at sea, contactEhline Law | Injury Lawyer PC

633 West Fifth Street, 28th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
213-596-9642
888-400-9721

View Larger Map

March 30, 2009 (by Aaron Marcus)

According to reports a waiter identified as Jorge Teixeria who has been charged with alleged aggravated sexual abuse was arraigned in Los Angeles District Court.This is a crime that cruise ship rape lawyers have often warned of and once again, it appears will result in a possible conviction of the alleged rapist.

Teixeria age 38, is a Portuguese national and was deemed a flight risk at his bail hearing and will be held in custody until his trial. Teixeria has worked on cruise ships for 18 years and if convicted of the charges could be sentenced to life in prison.

According to court documents the charges against Teixeria stem from a March 5^th incident aboard the Coral Princess while it was off the Coast of Mexico. He was charged after an unidentified 42 year old U.S. citizen made a criminal complaint.

It has been reported that the woman stated she had met the waiter in the dinning room, were Teixeria was the headwaiter. She and the waiter had shared some wine and she claims in the affidavit that after this he forced her to perform a sex act and assaulted her.

The Princess Cruise line claims that after the crime was reported the area where the assault took place was sealed off and Teixeria was restricted to his quarters, where he was guarded by security personnel.

According to the Assistant U.S. Attorney Reema M. El-Amamy, Teixeria admitted meeting the woman and stated that he touched her leg and another part of her body when they left the table. Teixeria denies sexually attacking the woman according to El-Amamy.

March 18, 2009 (by Aaron Marcus)

In the wake of the March 5-6, 2009 alleged rape on the Princess Cruise Liner, Coral Princess, lawmakers have introduced a cruise safety bill. I have been following this event since it occurred and so far it appears that a Princess Cruise ship waiter was charged with sexual assault by the FBI, and is awaiting trial in Central District Federal Court in Los Angeles County after the alleged passenger rape.

In recent years the cruise ship industry has faced criticism in high profile cases such as missing passengers and sexual attacks, while at sea. The cruise safety bill introduced Thursday will require the 38 billion dollar industry to report crimes at sea, to improve ship safety and to employ doctors that have training in assault examinations. Cruise ship doctors would also need to be U.S. licensed.

Princess cruise ship rape lawyer, Michael Ehline, a past contributor to Tanner and Haley News, based in Los Angeles, California, says the cruise safety bill is probably too little too late. In my interview with Ehline on March 15, 2009, I asked Ehline various questions as follows:

Q: Do you represent the victim of the Coral Princess alleged sexual assault?

Ehline: I have no comment as to who I do or do not represent at this time. It is the policy of the Ehline firm not to make a public spectacle out of cruise ship rape victims. However, I will say this, we don’t typically go to the national media and do press releases, or use celebrity attorneys to generate business.

We try and keep a low profile, meet the victim at the port of call here in Los Angeles, as our offices are just minutes away.  We try and get them away from the press and help the victim get the psychological support he or she needs. We also try and work to help the California federal prosecutors gather evidence, which hopefully will lead to a conviction of the rapist.

Q: Don’t you think not going to the press and identifying the victim will make it harder to get compensation for rape victims?

Ehline: On the contrary, I think attorneys who do that are shortsighted in their thinking. It can easily make a judge or jury think the victim is not really a victim at all. The only time I think the press is useful is to help effectuate new regulations, and to discredit the stories in the press that try and demonize the rape victims. Most of what I have seen online, or on the news generated by law firms, appears to be more hype and an attempt to get cases.

Q: What is the first thing a cruise ship rape victim should do?

Ehline: Well it depends. They are typically not in the right frame of mind to think clearly. But as a general rule, they need to contact the FBI immediately, and tell someone they trust about what happened to make a record. They must preserve evidence also. They should notify ship security as well as the ship’s doctor.

The dilemma here is that the cruise lines are common carriers and responsible for what happens on the ship. In other words, they are legally liable for the rape in most cases. So telling the defendant what happened sort of leaves the victim open to problems.

For example, the defendant cruise ship can lie, make up stories, issue bogus statements to the press before the ship even arrives in port, say they closed off a crime scene when they did not, or say they followed protocol when they did not, and numerous other things to mitigate a potential lawsuit or influence the public and/or a jury. Honestly, knowing this, the first thing I would do is contact a maritime lawyer and have my lawyer notify the FBI.

Q: Is there anything particular a rape victim needs to be aware of when attempting to retain a lawyer?

Ehline: Well there are many, but the most important thing is to know where the venue is the victim needs to sue, and where the case will be prosecuted against the rapist. Princess Cruise Lines require that any lawsuits brought against them be brought in California, as part of their passage contract.

I have seen many cases where the victim will hire an out of state lawyer to represent them who is not even licensed to practice law in the State of California. The cruise lines typically won’t offer as good of a settlement to an out of state lawyer in my opinion, because they don’t know California law, and the out of state attorney will have to associate another lawyer licensed in California to do the case here if it is against Princess.

So this means the out of state lawyer will have to refer the case to a lawyer here and share his or her fee. You tell me what you think is going to happen? Maybe they take the cheap settlement rather than share a larger one? It evens out and the client suffers.

The next issue is the criminal matter. How is a lawyer 3000 miles away going to attend the criminal matters and help the victim at the sentencing hearing of the criminal? And if your lawyer tells you a criminal conviction is not important, that is a sign that he or she doesn’t have a clue. The criminal conviction vindicates the victim and should easily lead to a quick and painless out of court settlement.

Q: What about the proposed legislation:

Ehline: Well what gets me angry is that there are already laws on the books. Look, the bulk of the cruise ships are registered in foreign countries, the companies are able to avoid paying income tax and they do not have to comply with the U.S. labor laws.

The recent bill that was introduced by Rep. Doris Matsui Democrat, Sacramento and Sen. John F. Kerry Democrat from Massachusetts requires that security latches and peepholes will need to be installed on cruise ships. How would a peephole have helped the most recent victim, when it is a crew member who is accused?

I agree about the guardrails, which will also need to be raised to the height of 54 inches.

Cruise ships will have to report some crimes to the FBI and to the Coast Guard according to this new bill. Rep Matsui stated that people going on cruises should be as safe as the can be and should feel safe. But my understanding that reporting sexual assault is that is already the law! After all the men overboard, all the rapes and cover ups, I just think this is way too little, way too late. Hiring cheap laborers from foreign countries who do not respect American cultural values, or laws, although not a politically correct thing to say, I believe is the major problem with cruise ships. I do not see that being addressed anywhere in any legislation. Foreigners need to be trained and educated as to what is legal and what is illegal and there need to be better background checks.  How do you know who these people are?

Q: Thank you for the interview.

Ehline: Your welcome.

After interviewing attorney Ehline, I did some additional research and found that Rep. Matsui has been fighting for cruise ship changes since being told by a constituent that she had been raped on a Royal Caribbean cruise and Matsui asked for congressional hearings. This was after Matsui contacted the cruise lines who stated they could not install peepholes.

One woman who testified before congress, Laurie Dishman, staed she was raped in 2004 on a Royal Caribbean cruise. She went on to testify that when she complained to cruise officials they stated she needed to control her drinking. When she went to the ships doctor instead of conducting a rape examination she was given two garbage bags and told to collect her own evidence. The U.S. Attorneys Office declined to prosecute the case after Dishman had been raped by one of the ship employees.

According to one statement by Kendall Carver the president and founder of the International Cruise Victims, the cruise industry need more oversite. Carver’s daughter disappeared off of an Alaska cruise in 2004.

Thursday the Cruise Lines International Association released a statement that their highest priority is the passenger’s safety and security. They also stated the incidents that are brought up in the bill of missing passengers and sexual assaults are rare. In their statement they say they are already required to report crimes by law and they have a voluntary agreement with the Coast Guard and the FBI.

Carver stated that the crimes keep going on and the recent rape case took the FBI two days to board the ship and if it had occurred in Los Angeles the police would have been waiting for the woman at the hospital. This was a rape reported by a passenger on the George from Portugal from Florida to Los Angeles on March 6. The ship involved was the Coral Princess and the man suspected of the rape was a cruise ship employee. We hope that this legislation argued by California Cruise Ship Rape Lawyer Ehline as being too little too late is a step in the right direction.

March 9, 2009

According to reports Federal agents boarded the Coral Princess cruise ship early today to arrest a crew member on the ship for allegedly raping a passenger.

According to FBI spokesperson Laura Eimiller after the Coral Princess docked FBI agents boarded the ship and arrested a crew member for cruise ship rape, identified as 38 year old Jorge Manuel Teixeira of Portugal.

Eimiller stated Teixeria is due in a Los Angeles court tomorrow where he will be formally charged for the alleged rape.

A spokes person for the Princess Cruises Julie Benson stated that two days ago when a passenger accused a crew member of the sexual assault the crime was reported and the area where the alleged rape took places was sealed off. The crew member who has since been identified as Jorge Manuel Teixeria was restricted to his quarters on the ship with a security person posted. The alleged victim was given medical and other assistance until the ship docked and the FBI agents boarded the cruise liner.

The Coral Princess was on a 14 day cruise with passengers from Fort Lauderdale Florida and its final destination of San Pedro, through the Panama Canal.

According to reports by cruise ship accident lawyers, the FBI says a couple that was aboard a Carnival cruise ship has disappeared and presumed to have gone overboard, their names have not been released. The couple was reported to be a 90 year old man and his 79 year old wife.

The couple it has been reported left from Long Beach on Monday and when the ship docked on Friday they were no longer aboard the cruise ship. Investigators have stated the ships crew last saw the couple on Tuesday evening at approximately 7:45 p.m.

According to FBI spokes person Laura Eimiller the ship left Long Beach with 2,052 passengers and was in route to Santa Catalina Island and then to Ensenada Mexico. FBI investigators boarded the ship and were interviewing passengers after Carnaval Cruise Line contacted them when the couple was found to be missing. An evidence response team boarded the ship to collect evidence from the couples stateroom that was found to be double locked from the inside with a “do not disturb” sign on the doorknob. The couple’s personal belongings were found in the room and the door to the balcony unlocked.

According to Petty Officer 2nd Class of the Coast Guard Prentice Danner, the Coast Guard was conducting a search for the couple from Ensenada, Mexico to Catalina Island and then to Long Beach. The Petty Officer stated no boats would be used due to the expansive area that was to be searched for the couple.

The Coast Guard search has since been halted after searching with no results and they have alerted ships captains in the area to the missing couple.

In a statement by Carnival Cruise Line spokes person Jennifer de la Cruz they have no knowledge if the man and his wife had gotten off the cruise ship at either the Catalina or Ensenada stops.

January 1, 2009

According to reports the Coast Guard has stated a man employed as part of the entertainment on the Carnival cruise ship Sensation reportedly fell overboard in the waters off of Florida.

The man allegedly fell overboard at approximately 1:00 a.m. on Thursday and in a statement from the Carnival cruise company the man was not working at the time he fell overboard and was a part of the entertainment staff on the cruise ship. Carnival also stated that six other crew members saw the employee fall overboard and the crew members stated the man accidentally fell from the ship. At the time the crew members saw him fall they threw him a life ring and also notified the ships officials. Then the Coast Guard was alerted to the situation according to Coast Guard Petty Officer 2nd Class James Harless.

Harless stated the man fell approximately 82 feet and the water was approximately 72 degrees. He also stated it is unclear if the man overboard was able to catch the life ring the crew members threw to him.

Carnival Cruise lines have also released a statement to the mans family and friends stating their thoughts and prayers are with him, his family and his friends.

The ship was approximately 20 miles from the coast of Vero Beach when the man fell from the ship, after a full day of searching he has not been found; searches were carried out on the water and by air. Harless of the Coast Guard stated they searched with a Coast Guard cutter, a smaller boat that was dispatched from Fort Pierce and a rescue helicopter.

The Carnival ship Sensation was in route from the Bahamas to Port Canaveral, the cruise ship was late returning and passengers stated the atmosphere today was solemn in light of the missing man. Carnival cruise ship accident attorneys are probably sharpening their swords to get this case.

December 28, 2008 (by Otto Smyth)

According to reports by Princess cruise ship accident lawyers, the Mexican Navy and the United States Coast Guard have been searching the waters off of Cancun for an American woman that reportedly fell from a Norwegian cruise ship.

The woman has been identified as Jennifer Feitz age 36 who was aboard the Norwegian Pearl cruise ship that left Miami for a seven day cruise to the western Caribbean. Feitz was reported missing by her husband before 5:00 a.m. Friday morning, when the ship was east of Isla Mujeres.

The Mexican Fifth Naval Regional Command stated they had been searching using navy boats and helicopters and had found no signs of the woman late Friday and had to halt their search due to difficult weather conditions and strong waves.

The United States Coast Guard was using a Falcon jet; they also halted their search until the next morning. They stated they will resume the search using a C-130 according to Petty Officer Third Class Nick Ameen. If you were injured in a cruise ship accident, call 888-400-9721 to speak with California cruise ship injury lawyers.

According to reports the search for Jennifer Feitz was taking place approximately 17 miles east of Cancun.

The Norwegian Cruise Line has made no public statement about Jennifer Feitz.

newspersonal injury attorney los angeles.

What are your rights as a cruise ship passenger injured on a cruise? This is a question often asked by disillusioned passengers injured on cruise ship vacations.  There are numerous accidents that such as sexual assault that can happen on dry land, and the very same accidents can also occur when you and your family are traveling on a cruise ship.  Accidents such as objects falling, which can cause a person injury and slips and falls are common occurrences that can happen no matter where you are, on land or at sea.  A crime such as theft is something that can also happen aboard a cruise ship.  Not only is this a crime that is committed by passengers aboard the ship, but it is also something that is done by crewmembers.  One problem that occurs regularly on cruise ships that is becoming a big concern to the U.S. Attorney General’s office is the fact that out of every four crimes that are being reported in Miami on cruise ships, three of them are sexual offenses that involve girls that are under the age of 21.

Strict Liability

46 U.S.C. §1702(6).  Under Section 3(6) of the Shipping Act of 1984, it states that cruise ships that depart from a port in the United States are considered to be a common carrier of passengers.  It is generally expected that a common carrier should maintain the special duty to safely bring passengers to their destination and to also maintain care of the highest degree to ensure they are protected against physical harm.

(See New Jersey Steamboat Co. v. Brockett, 121 U.S. 637, 645-646 (1887); Restatement (Second) of Torts §314A (1965).)  The special relationship between a carrier and its passengers involves one person entrusting himself to another’s protection and care. (See Holland America Cruises, Inc. v. Underwood, 470 So.2d 19, 20 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1985) (finding that common carrier has a duty to protect passengers from criminal attack.)) A cruise ship’s duty of safe transportation includes protection of the passenger from crew members’ rapes, molestations, and assaults. M.J. Norris, The Law of Maritime Personal Injuries, §3:3, at 62-63; §3:12, at 78 (4th ed. 1990).

In 1887 the Supreme Court made their first address on crewmembers assaults against passengers.  The ship’s watchman used excessive force removing a passenger from an area on the ship that was restricted in the New Jersey Steamboat case.  A passenger is entitled to being protected by the misconduct or negligence of the carrier’s servants’ by virtue of a contract for safe transportation, and the Court recognized this.  Because of the fact that the carrier relies upon the servants’ to perform the contract of transportation for the passengers, the misconduct or negligence of the servants’ would be the liability or responsibility of the ship.  Basing its findings on public policy and precedent found from railroad cases, the Court stated that it is the responsibility of a common carrier to protect its passengers from any misconduct committed by its own servant’s during the course of their employment.  Several years later the Supreme Court reaffirmed Brockett in New Orleans & N.E. R.R. Co. v. Jopes, 142 U.S. 18 (1891).  Although Jopes involved a passenger being shot by a conductor, the Court applied Brockett and further defined the common carrier liability rule.  The Court stated in Jopes that carriers are bound to make sure that passengers are protected from its own servants assaulting or injuring passengers.  Jopes expanded Brockett by removing the required employee act within the duration of his employment and held liability strictly on the carrier for acts made against passengers by its employees.  It is true that Jopes did not involve a passenger ship, but it involved a train instead, however the Court seen no difference between the modes of transportation because in both of these cases common carriers were involved.  In Morton v. De Oliveira, 984 F.2d 289 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Morton, 510U.S.907 (1993), where a passenger stated that she was raped by one of the crew members while in her cabin, the issue of passengers being assaulted by crew members was reviewed by the Ninth Circuit based on the usual “reasonable care under the circumstances” standard and the ship was held liable.

Personal Injury Case - Reasonable Care Standard

The court recognized first, in the context of a slip-and-fall accident of a crew member being visited by a man while on board a vessel that is docked at a pier, that duty falls on the ship owner of “reasonable care under the circumstances” towards individuals that are lawfully on board the vessel.  (Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625, 79 S.Ct. 406, 3 L.Ed.2d 550 (1959).)  In support of this particular conclusion, the Court cited admiralty cases that deal with personal injury aboard a vessel.  The issue was whether invitee-licensee distinctions as they were in common law, were recognized in admiralty.  It was found that these distinctions were brought about from legal concepts that were completely different than the law of the sea.  In conclusion, the Court found that it only made sense to take away distinctions that was based on the plaintiff being licensee or an invitee and a general standard of reasonable care should be applied.  In referencing personal injury cases that were shipboard and that involved non-crew members, the Court supported its conclusions.  In the First, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits, Kermarec is interpreted as creating a negligence standard of “reasonable care under the circumstances” for cases that were of personal injury, and retained Brockett’s stronger standards for misconduct towards passengers by a crew member.

Venue Selection Clauses

There is a forum selection clause on most cruise passenger tickets that can usually be found on the back of the ticket in microscopic type.  Because they normally control the venue in a case as well as the controlling law, careful attention must be paid to the clauses.  A California Court is generally designated when cruises depart from a California port such as Long Beach and San Francisco therefore, California law and 9th Circuit law control.  Cruise lines that are Miami-based will normally specify Miami as the venue.

Even though they frequently fail, objections can be made to the enforcement of the venue selection clause.  Before being overruled by the Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit did hold that, it was held by the Ninth Circuit that like other contracts of adhesion with non-negotiated terms, cruise line tickets with forum selection clauses are not enforceable. (Shute v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 899 F.2d 377, 388 (9th Cir. 1990).) The U. S. Supreme Court disagreed. (Shute, 499 U.S. 585.  The U. S. Supreme Court disagreed. Shute, 499 U.S. 585.)  The Court held by extending the analysis of “reasonableness”, that there are two different reasons why a non-negotiated forum selection clause might be reasonable in the cruise line business.  1.  “[b]ecause a cruise ship typically carries passengers from many locales, it is not unlikely that a mishap on a cruise could subject the cruise line to litigation in several different fora. …” 2. A forum selection clause would save the parties and the courts time and money by eliminating venue motions and would benefit passengers by reduced fares “reflecting the savings that the cruise line enjoys by limiting the fora in which it may be sued.” Intentional torts by a crew member is one claim that can be made and it lies outside the Court’s primary rationale because only an alleged intentional act is involved, and not one of a “mishap”.  In Johnson v. Commodore Cruise Lines, supra, it drew this distinction, where cruise ship tickets were limited another exceptional protection adhesion clause, which is a provision of a shortened time-to-sue for bodily injury suits as authorized by 46 U.S.C. §183b.  Based on an alleged conspiracy to conceal a rape by a crewmember, plaintiffs sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress and other wrongs.  Under the law of Mississippi, where plaintiffs bought their tickets, the contractual limitations period was much shorter than what was provided in this law. 

Rejecting this defense, the court wrote:

“Congressional concern in enacting the statutes in which § 183b was a part was to limit the liability of a shipowner for events arising in the general course of shipping and navigation. [Citation.] There is no suggestion in either the language of the statutes or in their legislative history of any intention to limit the liability of a shipowner for the affirmative misconduct or its mismanagement toward passengers. Accordingly, we find that § 183b does not preempt Mississippi’s prohibition against contractually shortening limitations periods and, therefore, that the six-month time-to-sue provision in plaintiffs’ tickets is invalid.Id., at 745.

Finally, plaintiff may assert that defendant’s forum selection clause was unfair as applied to plaintiff because he/she had no opportunity to reject the clause without financial forfeiture. A forum selection clause may be unreasonable as applied to a passenger who does not learn of it until after the ticket is purchased and lacks opportunity to reject the contract without a penalty. Under these circumstances, the clause may be deemed unreasonable as to the plaintiff. (See, Corna v. American Hawaii Cruises, Inc., 794 F. Supp. 1005, 1011-1012 (D. Haw. 1992) (clause not enforced); Kalman v. Cunard Line, Ltd., 904 F. Supp. 1150 (D. Haw. 1995) motion to dismiss denied pending resolution of disputed facts); cf. Cross v. Kloster Cruise Lines, Ltd. 897 F. Supp. 1304 (D. Or. 1995) (10 days’ notice, $400 penalty, clause enforced).)

This means what are your rights as a cruise ship passenger injured on a cruise will depend in large part what jurisdiction the case will be filed in.  Princess cruise ship rape cases must typically be filed in Los Angeles County, California and requires Los Angeles cruise ship accident attorneys, and that Royal Caribbean cases must typically be filed in Florida.