Because Vessel Was "Thrill Ride" Vessel Available For Customers Who Willingly Went For A Ride, Boat Trip On Which Passenger Was Injured Did Not Involve "Transporting Passengers," And 46 U.S.C.S. App. § 183c(A) Did Not Apply. In Passenger's Negligence Act
Sandra A. Cook, Appellant, vs. Crazy Boat of Key West, Inc., and William Shepard, Appellees.
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT
2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 3303; 32 Fla. L. Weekly D 644
March 7, 2007, Opinion Filed
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant, a passenger who was injured in a boat ride, sued appellee corporation, seeking damages for injuries allegedly suffered during the boat ride. The Circuit Court for Monroe County (Florida) granted summary judgment in favor of the corporation. The passenger appealed.
OVERVIEW: The passenger admitted to signing a release, but claimed that this release was void pursuant to 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 183c(a), and because the release was ambiguous and did not contain the word "negligence." The appellate court found that the trial court properly rejected both of these contentions. The vessel was a "thrill ride" vessel that was available for customers who willingly desired to go for a ride. The corporation was not in the business of "transporting passengers" but rather it was in the business of providing a recreational activity. In addition, the corporation did not travel between ports of the United States but rather left from and returned to the same port. Accordingly, 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 183c(a) did not apply. The appellate court also rejected the passenger's contention that the statutory language "between ports of the United States" could have been interpreted to apply to trips out from one port and back to that same port as it contradicted the plain language of the statute. The release was not ambiguous because it failed to use the term "negligence." The release encompassed the alleged negligence which was the basis of the passenger's claim.
OUTCOME: The judgment was affirmed.
