Summary Judgment Granted against Cruise Line Passenger bitten by Spider on Cruise Ship Where Passenger Was Unable to Show any Notice to Cruise Line of Spider Problem Aboard Ship.
ALLEN ILAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PRINCESS CRUISES, INC., Defendant and Respondent.
B151303
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE
2002 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 9593
October 16, 2002, Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Super. Ct. No. SC 058753. Cesar C. Sarmiento, Judge.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
OVERVIEW: Defendant Princess Cruises, Inc. (Princess) obtained summary judgment in the trial court on plaintiff Allen Ilan's (Ilan) complaint alleging negligence and breach of warranty. Seeking reversal of the summary judgment, Ilan contends on appeal that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because triable issues of material fact existed with respect to whether Princess was negligent. We conclude that Ilan has waived any challenge to the summary adjudication of the warranty cause of action and that Princess met its burden to demonstrate that Ilan could not establish its negligence cause of action. In the absence of any evidence of disputed facts from Ilan to rebut Princess's showing with respect to the negligence cause of action, we affirm the judgment. Ilan alleged that he was been bitten by a hobo spider while in bed on a Princess cruise ship, and sued for negligence and breach of warranty. Princess moved for summary judgment, contending that (1) Ilan was not bitten by a hobo spider and that the ailments he claimed could not have arisen from a spider bite; (2) any spider bite was unforeseeable, so Princess bore Ilan no duty to insure against the presence of a spider on the ship; (3) Princess had no notice of a dangerous condition on the ship prior to the alleged incident and therefore could not as a matter of law have been negligent; and (4) as a matter of law there was no warranty against the presence of a spider on the ship, so there could not have been any breach of warranty. Princess set forth the following facts in its separate statement of undisputed facts: it is impossible for a hobo spider to have caused the physical problems of which Ilan complained; Ilan did not suffer any of the ailments commonly associated with hobo spider bites; the spider described by Ilan did not resemble a hobo spider; and some of the ailments alleged by Ilan were in fact associated with the prescription medications Ilan was taking. Princess also produced evidence concerning its pest control procedures and the absence of any prior reports of spiders on board.
OUTCOME: The Order Granting Princess' Motion for Summary Judgment was Affirmed.
