Court Dismisses Seaman's Complaint For Wrongful Discharge But Recognizes A Public Policy Exception To The At-Will Nature Of Maritime Employment...
Ninth Circuit holds that cruise line limitation of liability clause printed within passenger ticket, attempting to limit liability to the terms set forth in the Athens Convention, did not reasonably communicate a liability limitation and was therefore not enforceable.
BOBBIE JO WALLIS, in her individual capacity as Administrator of the Estate and Personal Representative of Joel Anderson Wallis, Deceased, for the benefit of Ervin B. Wallis, Helen Wallis, Joel Shannon Wallis, Stacy Trent Wallis, Jolie Amanda Wallis and Vallie Jo Wallis, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PRINCESS CRUISES, INC.; FAIRLANE SHIPPING INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, LTD.; PRINCESS CRUISE LINES, LTD., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-56700
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 20097; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service9829; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 11080
June 5, 2002, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California
September 24, 2002, Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. D.C. No. CV-00-07239-WJR. William J. Rea, District Judge, Presiding.
DISPOSITION: Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded for further proceedings.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff, spouse of deceased passenger, appealed from an order of the United States District Court for the Central District of California granting defendants', cruise line and related parties, summary judgment, except for the spouse's Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA), 46 U.S.C.S. §§ 761-767, claim, and limiting the cruise line's liability in accordance with a clause printed on the back of the passenger's ticket.
OVERVIEW: The spouse brought an action against the cruise line for damages based on the death of her husband, who drowned off the coast of Greece after falling in an undetermined manner from the cruise line's cruise ship. Upon review of the district court granted the cruise line's motions for summary judgment, the court of appeals reversed the grant of partial summary judgment limiting recoverable damages, and held that a contract clause printed on a passenger's that merely refers to the "Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and Their Luggage by Sea' of 1976 (Athens Convention)" does not reasonably communicate a liability limitation. Notably the court determined that it was unrealistic to assume the average passenger with no legal background would even attempt to analyze the conditions under which the Athens Convention would or would not apply. Further the court found that even if a passenger was motivated to undertake such effort, it would require some legal and financial sophistication, and that the ticket's failure to provide an approximate monetary limitation did not meaningfully inform a passenger of a liability limitation, and was therefore unenforceable.
OUTCOME: The district court's grant of partial summary judgment limiting the cruise lines' liability was reversed, and the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the cruise line on the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress was affirmed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.
