UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

Case No. 

MONICA DEL PINO, 

as Personal Representative 

of the Estate of Carlos Detoro, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

OCEANIA CRUISES S. de R.L., 

d/b/a OCEANIA CRUISES, 

Defendant. 

/ 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

Plaintiff, MONICA DEL PINO, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Carlos 

Detoro, hereby sues OCEANIA CRUISES S. de R.L., d/b/a OCEANIA CRUISES, a Foreign for 

profit Corporation, (hereinafter “OCEANIA”) and alleges as follows: 

THE PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff, MONICA DEL PINO (“Mrs. Del Pino”) is a citizen and resident of the

State of Florida. Mrs. Del Pino has been, or in the future will be appointed as the Personal 

Representative of Carlos Detoro (“Mr. Detoro”), her deceased father. This action is brought on 

behalf of the Estate of Carlos Detoro, as well as individual claims on behalf of the survivor, his 

daughter Monica Del Pino. 

2. Defendant, OCEANIA, is a foreign corporation with its worldwide headquarters,

principal address, and principal place of business in Miami, Florida. 

3. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter because the causes of action asserted

herein arise under 28 U.S.C. § 1333 and the General Maritime Laws of the United States. 

1:20-cv-22410

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 1 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

2 

4. The Court has jurisdiction over OCEANIA pursuant to Florida Statutes §48.193 

because (a) OCEANIA is engaged in substantial and not isolated business activity within this 

state, and routinely operates in the waters of this state; (b) the causes of action set forth herein 

arise from OCEANIA, personally and/or through its agents, operating, conducting, engaging in, 

or carrying on a business or business venture in this state or having an office or agency in this 

state; and (c) the causes of action set forth herein arise from OCEANIA, personally and/or 

through its agents, committing tortious acts in whole or in part within this state. 

5. Venue is proper in this Court because OCEANIA’s principal place of business is 

within Miami-Dade County and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the 

causes of action set forth herein occurred within the county. The cruise line ticket at issue also 

requires that suit be brought in this Court. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

6. OCEANIA, as a common carrier, is engaged in the business of providing vacation 

cruises to the public aboard vessels including the OCEANIA Marina. At all times material 

hereto, OCEANIA owned, operated, managed, maintained, and/or controlled the OCEANIA 

Marina, including the medical department. 

7. OCEANIA, through online, television, radio and print advertisements specifically 

markets its cruises as the world’s largest upper premium cruise line providing the highest quality 

cruise product for mature and discerning travelers. 

8. As part of providing vacation cruises, OCEANIA is obligated to provide 

competent medical care and facilities, as well as personnel capable of making sound medical and 

evacuation decisions. 

9. As part of providing vacation cruises, OCEANIA advertised that the ship’s 

onboard medical center was staffed by international medical personnel. OCEANIA advertised 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 2 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

3 

that its doctors meet American College of Emergency Physicians and ICCL (International 

Council of Cruise Lines) guidelines, including: current physician licensure, three years of postgraduate / post-registration clinical practice in general and emergency medicine or Board 

certification in emergency medicine, family practice or internal medicine or competent skill level 

in advance life support and cardiac care. 

10. OCEANIA charges money to passengers for medical services provided. As such, 

OCEANIA is in the business of providing medical services to passengers for profit, and owes a 

duty to provide competent and non-negligent medical care and services. 

11. OCEANIA owned, operated, controlled, and/or maintained the medical center 

aboard the Marina. OCEANIA maintained a medical operations division at corporate 

headquarters in Miami, Florida. The onboard medical center and medical operations division 

work as a team in the event of medical evacuation emergency. OCEANIA is aware that medical 

emergencies may arise on its vessels and is aware of the essential need to promptly evacuate 

passengers suffering from serious medical emergencies. 

12. OCEANIA advertised that it has established contacts throughout the world with 

several different emergency rooms/hospitals where on board doctors can refer patients for 

medical care. 

13. OCEANIA, through its shore-side Fleet Medical Operations division, had the 

ability to control and monitor each and every step taken by its medical staff onboard via 

telephone, video conference, skype, or otherwise. 

14. OCEANIA’s officials and employees had the ability to monitor and participate in 

safety, security, and medical emergencies onboard the vessel by communicating with the 

Marina’s crew via telephone, videoconference, Skype and other means of communication. 

OCEANIA, through both the crew onboard and their shore-side officials and employees, who 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 3 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

4 

acted in consultation with one another, failed to properly care and promptly and properly 

evacuate Mr. De Toro. 

15. Upon information and belief, the Master of the Marina was consulted regarding 

Mr. De Toro’s condition and the emergent nature of the situation. The Master is an employee or 

agent of OCEANIA and had the ability to divert or control the vessel or make the appropriate 

decision to afford one of its passengers the medical care and treatment he desperately needed. 

He and his bridge team are also responsible with determining the logistics for medical evacuation 

or disembarkation, properly coordinating the evacuation of sick and injured individuals, and 

ensuring that OCEANIA passengers are afforded the logistical support needed during a medical 

emergency. This responsibility is carried out in conjunction with OCEANIA shore-based fleet 

operations and shore based individuals from OCEANIA that coordinate voyage logistics. 

16. At all times OCEANIA was vicariously liable for the negligence of the medical 

staff and doctors onboard the Marina, who were employees, apparent agents, or actual agents, of 

OCEANIA. 

17. At all times OCEANIA was vicariously liable for the negligence of the nonmedical personnel onboard the Marina, who were employees, apparent agents, or actual agents, 

of OCEANIA. 

18. At all times OCEANIA had control or the right to control all persons working in 

its medical departments, including the Doctors and personnel that improperly treated and 

negligently mismanaged Mr. Detoro’s condition. 

19. Mr. Detoro relied upon OCEANIA’s representations regarding its available 

shipboard medical facility with its qualified and competent physicians in his decision to purchase 

the cruise and contract with OCEANIA. 

 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 4 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

5 

20. On February 24, 2020, Mr. Detoro boarded the OCEANIA Marina for a South 

American cruise from Argentina to Peru. Mr. Detoro was a paying passenger. 

21. During the evening of February 26, 2020, Mr. Detoro presented to the Marina’s

medical center to receive care and treatment from the ship’s physician for symptoms of 

weakness, sore throat, fever, chills, cough, and shortness of breath. He was examined by Dr. 

Andrzej Gaszynski, M.D. 

22. At all times material, Dr. Gaszynski was an employee or agent of OCEANIA, as 

its ship physician and was at all time material acting within the course and scope of his 

employment or agency with OCEANIA. 

23. Dr. Gasynski diagnosed Mr. Detoro with strep throat and left lower lobe 

bronchitis. Mr. Detoro was discharged to his stateroom to rest and instructed to follow up the 

next morning. 

24. The following morning, on February 27, 2020, Mr. Detoro reported to the 

Marina’s medical center as instructed. He was still ill, and was admitted to the medical center 

for observation and nebulization treatment. Again he was discharged. 

25. Later that day, at around 1:30 p.m. Mr. Detoro’s condition worsened. He began 

to suffer from shortness of breath, wheezing, and respiratory distress. His traveling companion 

called the medical center and Mr. Detoro was transported back by wheelchair. The color of his 

body and face looked abnormal due to a lack of oxygen. At the medical center the decision was 

made to administer oxygen by nasal canula to improve his symptoms of shortness of breath, 

wheezing, and respiratory distress. 

26. A medical note from Dr. Andrzej authored at 8:12 p.m. indicates that Mr. Detoro 

was not feeling better; he was still coughing and suffering an elevated temperature. 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 5 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

6 

Notwithstanding his worsening condition, Mr. Detoro was discharged from the Marina medical 

center and sent to his stateroom. He was so weak and ill that medical staff had to push him back 

to his stateroom by wheelchair. His condition continued to deteriorate after he was sent back to 

his stateroom without the benefit of observation, care and treatment. 

27. At around 3:00 a.m. on the morning of February 28, 2020, Mr. Detoro had to be 

readmitted to the Marina medical center, again for shortness of breath. He was noted to be in 

respiratory distress and was put on oxygen. 

28. In the afternoon of February 28, 2020, at around 1:48 p.m., a consultation was 

conducted with a shore-side physician. Dr. Gaszynski indicated that the treatment plan was to 

keep Mr. Detoro overnight in the ward for close monitoring, to repeat lab tests and to disembark 

Mr. Detoro ashore in Port Stanley, Falkland Islands via ambulance upon arrival. Dr. Gaszynski 

noted that the vessel was still eighteen (18) hours away from port. 

29. The shore side physician responded to Dr. Gaszynski indicating that Mr. Detoro 

should be disembarked at the next available port for a full evaluation, that arterial blood gasses 

should be analyzed, and that respiratory support should be implemented, amongst other 

recommendations. 

30. Mr. Detoro’s condition continued to decline as the hours passed on the 

excessively long journey towards the Falkland Islands. He was suffering from hypoxemia and 

could not breathe normally. Shortness of breath is a major red flag for any competent physician 

and should prompt urgent and serious action. Despite Mr. Detoro’s dire and life threatening 

condition, Dr. Gaszynski and the Oceania staff failed to timely and properly act and failed to 

timely and properly disembark Mr. Detoro from the Marina. 

31. Dr. Gaszynski and the Oceania medical staff negligently anchored their diagnosis 

and treatment on strep throat and bronchitis, which are not life threatening conditions. They 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 6 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

7 

failed to ascertain Mr. Detoro’s arterial blood gas levels and failed to properly treat his shortness 

of breath and the lack of oxygen to his body. They failed to timely and properly intubate and 

ventilate him. 

32. At around 9:35 p.m. Dr. Gaszynski noted that Mr. Detoro was not breathing 

properly, he was only occasionally gasping for air. He was connected to a cardiac monitor which 

revealed pulseless electrical activity. Only at that point too far, long after the proper window for 

treatment had passed, did Dr. Gaszynski elect to intubate and ventilate Mr. Detoro. Dr. 

Gaszynski excessive delay in intubating Mr. Detoro caused Mr. Detoro’s organs to fail and 

cardiac arrest. Mr. Detoro was pronounced dead at 10:10 p.m. 

33. The afore described acts of negligence, excessive and unreasonable negligent 

delay in disembarking the patient to a higher level of care, and excessive and unreasonable 

negligent delays in administering proper treatment caused Mr. Detoro to suffer greatly and 

directly and proximately led to his death. 

34. OCEANIA’s physicians, including Dr. Gaszynski and the OCEANIA shoreside 

medical team are aware of the time-sensitive nature of respiratory distress and shortness of 

breath. It is known by OCEANIA that such a condition calls for urgent treatment at a capable 

facility. Furthermore, time is of the essence in intubating and ventilating a patient who is unable 

to breath on their own. 

35. In light of the symptoms and manifestations exhibited by Mr. Detoro, any 

reasonably prudent healthcare provider in Dr. Gaszynski’s position would have known that a 

medical air-evacuation or other expeditious disembarkation to a comprehensive treatment center 

was medically necessary. 

36. An air-evacuation was both medically necessary and operationally feasible to 

transport Mr. Detoro to a higher level of care. 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 7 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

8 

37. Despite Mr. Detoro’s dire condition which required urgent disembarkation to a 

higher level of care, and knowing that an air evacuation with a helicopter, rendezvous with a 

rescue vessel, or expeditious diversion of the vessel to a point of debarkation was operationally 

feasible, OCEANIA failed to analyze or inquire as to possible disembarkation options to assist 

Mr. Detoro. Instead, the decision was made to keep him on the vessel for an excessive and 

medically unacceptable period of time. He was left without the proper care and treatment that he 

needed as a result. 

38. OCEANIA personnel made the decision to continue to the Falkland Islands, its 

scheduled itinerary, without making any effort or arrangements to medically evacuate Mr. 

Detoro or get him to a higher level of care capable of treating him for his condition prior to 

arrival at the pre-planned port of call. It appears that the Master and shore-side fleet operations 

never consulted any third-parties, or examined any possibilities for medical disembarkation or 

evacuation other than continuing on the pre-arranged voyage plan. Their aim was clear, to avoid 

operational disruption to the great detriment of their passenger. 

39. The failure to properly evaluate Mr. Detoro and disembark him to a proper level 

of care, and the corresponding delays caused by OCEANIA, prevented him from being 

emergently evacuated from the Marina and evaluated by specialists who are trained to treat such 

patients. 

40. The delays caused by OCEANIA’s negligence caused Mr. Detoro to suffer 

devastating injuries, the loss of oxygen to the organs of his body, and directly and proximately 

caused his death. 

41. All conditions precedent to the commencement of this action have been 

performed, waived, or otherwise satisfied. 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 8 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

9 

COUNT I – NEGLIGENCE 

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 – 41 of this Complaint. 

42. In light of OCEANIA’s experience and familiarity with the demographics of the 

passengers on its cruises, the onboard and offshore recreational activities taking place on its 

cruises, the foreign destinations visited on its cruises, and the illnesses and emergencies 

experienced by past cruise passengers, it was reasonably foreseeable to OCEANIA that the 

Marina would have passengers similar in age to Mr. Detoro, and passengers with common 

illnesses and emergencies such as his condition. Likewise, it was reasonably foreseeable that 

such passengers would require proper examination, evaluation, treatment, and evacuation. 

43. OCEANIA owed the duty of exercising reasonable care under the circumstances. 

In particular, as Mr. Detoro suffered shortness of breath and respiratory failure onboard the 

Marina and was taken to the ship’s medical center, OCEANIA owed Mr. Detoro the duty of 

protecting him from injury relating to his emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care 

to furnish such aid and assistance as ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar 

circumstances. 

44. OCEANIA breached its duty of protecting Mr. Detoro from injury relating to his 

emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care to furnish such aid and assistance as 

ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar circumstances. OCEANIA breached its 

duty in one or more of the following ways: 

a. OCEANIA failed to properly treat Mr. Detoro; 

b. OCEANIA negligently misdiagnosed and anchored on the wrong 

diagnosis; 

 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 9 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

10 

c. OCEANIA failed to perform or arrange for appropriate diagnostics 

testing given Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

d. OCEANIA failed to obtain consultations with appropriate 

specialists; 

e. OCEANIA failed to properly monitor Mr. Detoro; 

f. OCEANIA failed to air-evacuate Mr. Detoro from the ship so 

that he could promptly receive treatment; 

g. OCEANIA failed to timely divert the ship so that Mr. Detoro 

could promptly receive treatment; 

h. OCEANIA failed to properly or timely consult qualified shorebased personnel regarding Mr. Detoro ’s condition; 

i. OCEANIA failed to obtain a proper medical opinion regarding Mr. 

Detoro ’s condition; 

j. OCEANIA failed to timely utilize “Telemedicine” and other 

resources on the vessel to properly assess Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

k. OCEANIA failed to develop and institute adequate procedures and 

policies to address Mr. Detoro ’s medical situation; 

l. OCEANIA failed to appreciate the severity of Mr. Detoro’s 

worsening condition; 

m. OCEANIA failed to perform any procedure to Mr. Detoro’s 

medical benefit; 

n. OCEANIA failed to properly ascertain sufficient information to 

determine where Mr. Detoro should be transferred; 

o. OCEANIA deviated from the standard of care for treating patients 

in Mr. Detoro’s condition. 

45. OCEANIA knew or reasonably should have known about these conditions and 

failures, but failed to correct them prior to the incident that caused Mr. Detoro’s death. These 

conditions and failures were longstanding and obvious to OCEANIA. OCEANIA is aware that 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 10 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

11 

passengers may suffer from life threatening conditions such as shortness of breath and 

respiratory failure, and are aware of the urgent need to evacuate such patients to competent 

medical centers capable of providing treatment. 

46. As a direct and proximate result of OCEANIA breaching its duty to Mr. Detoro, 

he suffered greatly and died. If Mr. Detoro had received appropriate care and treatment onboard 

or been timely evacuated from the ship, he would not have suffered such devastating injuries 

causing his death. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against 

OCEANIA for all damages recoverable under the law. 

COUNT II – NEGLIGENCE OF NON-MEDICAL PERSONNEL 

(Vicarious Liability Based Upon Actual Agency / Respondeat Superior) 

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 – 41 of this Complaint. 

47. In light of OCEANIA’s experience and familiarity with the demographics of the 

passengers on its cruises, the onboard and offshore recreational activities taking place on its 

cruises, the foreign destinations visited on its cruises, and the illnesses and emergencies 

experienced by past cruise passengers, it was reasonably foreseeable to OCEANIA that the 

Marina would have passengers similar in age to Mr. Detoro, and passengers with common 

illnesses and emergencies such as his condition. Likewise, it was reasonably foreseeable that 

such passengers would require proper medical logistical support and medical evacuation. 

48. OCEANIA, through its non-medical personnel, including its officers, directors, 

employees, agents, servants and/or persons otherwise authorized to act on behalf of OCEANIA, 

both on board the Marina and located at OCEANIA’s shore-side offices, owed the duty of 

exercising reasonable care under the circumstances. In particular, as Mr. Detoro suffered 

shortness of breath and respiratory failure onboard the Marina and was taken to the ship’s 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 11 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

12 

medical center, OCEANIA owed the duty of protecting him from injury relating to his emergent 

condition, and of exercising reasonable care to furnish such aid and assistance as ordinarily 

prudent persons would render under similar circumstances. 

49. OCEANIA, through the negligence of its non-medical personnel, breached its 

duty to exercise reasonable care to furnish such aid and assistance as ordinarily prudent persons 

would render under similar circumstances. OCEANIA breached its duty in one or more of the 

following ways:

a. OCEANIA failed to timely and properly communicate the 

condition of Mr. Detoro to its shore side personnel; 

b. OCEANIA failed to follow proper policies and procedures to 

ascertain the operational feasibility of a medical evacuation for Mr. 

Detoro; 

c. OCEANIA failed to air-evacuate Mr. Detoro from the ship so 

that he could promptly receive treatment; 

d. OCEANIA failed to timely divert the ship so that Mr. Detoro 

could promptly receive treatment; 

e. OCEANIA failed to evacuate Mr. Detoro by speed boat, tender 

boat, or transfer; 

f. OCEANIA refused to alter its itinerary to transport Mr. Detoro, 

electing to avoid operational disruption over the needs of its 

critically ill guest. 

50. OCEANIA, through its non-medical personnel, knew or reasonably should have 

known about these conditions and failures, but failed to correct them prior to the incident that 

caused the death of Mr. Detoro. These conditions and failures were longstanding and obvious to 

OCEANIA. 

51. As a direct and proximate result of OCEANIA breaching its duty to Mr. Detoro, 

he suffered greatly and died. If Mr. Detoro had received appropriate care and treatment onboard 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 12 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

13 

or been timely evacuated from the ship, he would not have suffered such devastating injuries and 

died. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against 

OCEANIA for all damages recoverable under the law. 

COUNT III – NEGLIGENCE OF MEDICAL PERSONNEL 

(Vicarious Liability Based Upon Actual Agency / Respondeat Superior) 

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 – 41 of this Complaint. 

52. OCEANIA’s medical personnel, including the doctors and nurses on board the 

Marina, were the employees, agents, servants and/or persons otherwise authorized to act on 

behalf of OCEANIA. Thus, OCEANIA is vicariously liable for the acts and/or omissions of its 

medical personnel. 

53. OCEANIA acknowledged that its medical personnel, including the doctors and 

nurses onboard the Marina, would act for it, and the medical personnel manifested an acceptance 

of the undertaking. For example: (1) OCEANIA directly paid the medical personnel for their 

work in the medical center onboard the Marina; (2) the medical center on board the Marina was 

created, owned and operated by OCEANIA; (3) the medical personnel on board the Marina

worked at what OCEANIA describes in its advertising as OCEANIA’s medical center; and (4) 

OCEANIA knowingly provided, and the medical personnel on board the Marina knowingly 

wore, uniforms bearing OCEANIA’s name and logo; the ship physician on the Marina is 

considered and titled an officer of OCEANIA’s cruise line. 

54. OCEANIA’s medical personnel, including the doctors and nurses on board the 

Marina, were subject to the right of control by OCEANIA, and were acting within the scope of 

their employment or agency. For example: (1) the medical personnel were employed by 

OCEANIA; (2) the medical personnel were hired to work in a medical center on board the 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 13 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

14 

Marina that was created, owned and operated by OCEANIA; (3) the medical personnel were 

paid salaries and/or other employment related benefits directly by OCEANIA; (4) the medical 

personnel on board the Marina were considered to be members of the ship’s crew; (5) the 

medical personnel were required to wear uniforms or other insignia furnished by OCEANIA; (6) 

OCEANIA put the medical personnel on board the Marina under the command of the ship’s 

superior officers, and they were subject to the ship’s discipline and the master’s orders; (7) 

OCEANIA had the right to fire its medical personnel; (8) OCEANIA directly billed the Plaintiff 

and other passengers onboard the Marina for services rendered by its medical personnel and/or 

use of the onboard medical center, medical equipment and medical supplies; and (9) the medical 

personnel on board the Marina were subject to the control of OCEANIA’s shore-side medical 

department. 

55. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, owed Mr. Detoro the duty of 

exercising reasonable care under the circumstances. In particular, as Mr. Detoro suffered 

shortness of breath and respiratory failure on board the Marina and was taken to the ship’s 

medical center, OCEANIA owed Mr. Detoro the duty of protecting him from injury relating to 

his emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care to furnish such aid and assistance as 

ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar circumstances. 

56. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, breached its duty of protecting Mr. 

Detoro from injury relating to his emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care to 

furnish such aid and assistance as ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar 

circumstances. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, breached its duty in one or more of 

the following ways: 

 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 14 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

15 

a. OCEANIA failed to properly treat Mr. Detoro; 

b. OCEANIA negligently misdiagnosed and anchored on the wrong 

diagnosis; 

c. OCEANIA failed to perform or arrange for appropriate diagnostics 

testing given Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

d. OCEANIA failed to obtain consultations with appropriate 

specialists; 

e. OCEANIA failed to properly monitor Mr. Detoro; 

f. OCEANIA failed to air-evacuate or expeditiously disembark 

Mr. Detoro from the ship so that he could promptly receive 

treatment; 

g. OCEANIA failed to timely divert the ship so that Mr. Detoro 

could promptly receive treatment; 

h. OCEANIA failed to evacuate Mr. Detoro by speed boat, tender 

boat, or transfer; 

i. OCEANIA failed to properly or timely consult qualified shorebased personnel regarding Mr. Detoro ’s condition; 

j. OCEANIA failed to obtain a proper medical opinion regarding Mr. 

Detoro ’s condition; 

k. OCEANIA failed to timely utilize “Telemedicine” and other 

resources on the vessel to properly assess Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

l. OCEANIA failed to develop and institute adequate procedures and 

policies to address Mr. Detoro ’s medical situation; 

m. OCEANIA failed to appreciate the severity of Mr. Detoro’s 

worsening condition; 

n. OCEANIA failed to perform any procedure to Mr. Detoro ’s 

medical benefit; 

o. OCEANIA failed to timely intubate and ventilate Mr. Detoro; 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 15 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

16 

p. OCEANIA negligently failed to monitor Mr. Detoro’s oxygen 

levels or analyze his blood gas; 

q. OCEANIA deviated from the standard of care for treating patients 

in Mr. Detoro’s condition. 

57. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, knew or reasonably should have 

known about these conditions and failures, but failed to correct them prior to the incident that 

injured Plaintiff. These conditions and failures were longstanding and obvious to OCEANIA. 

58. As a direct and proximate result of OCEANIA breaching its duty to Mr. Detoro, 

he suffered greatly and died. If Mr. Detoro had received appropriate care and treatment onboard 

or been timely evacuated from the ship, he would not have suffered and died. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against 

OCEANIA for all damages recoverable under law. 

COUNT IV – NEGLIGENCE OF MEDICAL PERSONNEL 

(Vicarious Liability Based Upon Apparent Agency) 

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 – 41 of this Complaint. 

59. OCEANIA’s medical personnel, including the doctors and nurses on board the 

Marina, were the apparent employees, agents, servants and/or persons otherwise authorized to 

act on behalf of OCEANIA. Thus, OCEANIA is vicariously liable for the acts and/or omissions 

of its medical personnel. 

60. OCEANIA made representations to the Plaintiff and other passengers onboard the 

Marina that the ship’s medical personnel were the employees, agents, servants and/or persons 

otherwise authorized to act for OCEANIA’s benefit. For example: (1) OCEANIA promoted the 

medical personnel on board the Marina and represented them as being OCEANIA employees 

through brochures, internet advertising and/or signs, documents, and uniforms on the ship; (2) 

OCEANIA promoted the medical center on board the Marina and described it in proprietary 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 16 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

17 

language; (3) the medical personnel on board the Marina worked in the medical center that 

OCEANIA promoted and described in proprietary language; (4) OCEANIA directly bills the 

Plaintiff and other passengers onboard the Marina for services rendered by the onboard medical 

personnel and/or use of the onboard medical center, medical equipment and medical supplies; (5) 

the medical personnel on board the Marina were required to wear uniforms or other insignia 

furnished by OCEANIA; (6) OCEANIA held out the medical personnel on board the Marina as 

members of the ship’s crew; and (7) the medical personnel on board the Marina spoke and acted 

as though they were employed by OCEANIA. OCEANIA had knowledge of such 

representations but never took any action to indicate otherwise. 

61. OCEANIA’s representations to the Plaintiff and other passengers onboard the 

Marina caused them to reasonably believe that the ship’s medical personnel were the employees, 

agents, servants and/or persons otherwise authorized to act for OCEANIA’s benefit. Indeed, 

OCEANIA actually intended that the Plaintiff and other passengers onboard the Marina have 

such perception or belief because it is a marketing tool to induce passengers such as the Plaintiff 

to purchase cruises on OCEANIA ships in the first place, to feel secure while on board 

OCEANIA s’ ships and/or to be a repeat customer. 

62. OCEANIA s’ representations to the Plaintiff and other passengers onboard the 

Marina induced their detrimental, justifiable reliance upon the appearance of agency. For 

example, Mr. Detoro justifiably relied upon OCEANIA s’ representations in deciding to 

purchase a cruise on the Marina. 

63. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, owed Mr. Detoro the duty of 

exercising reasonable care under the circumstances. In particular, as Mr. Detoro suffered 

shortness of breath and respiratory failure onboard the Marina and was taken to the ship’s 

medical center, OCEANIA owed Mr. Detoro the duty of protecting him from injury relating to 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 17 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

18 

his emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care to furnish such aid and assistance as 

ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar circumstances. 

64. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, breached its duty of protecting 

Plaintiff from injury relating to his emergent condition, and of exercising reasonable care to 

furnish such aid and assistance as ordinarily prudent persons would render under similar 

circumstances. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, breached its duty in one or more of 

the following ways: 

a. OCEANIA failed to properly treat Mr. Detoro; 

b. OCEANIA negligently misdiagnosed and anchored on the wrong 

diagnosis; 

c. OCEANIA failed to perform or arrange for appropriate diagnostics 

testing given Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

d. OCEANIA failed to obtain consultations with appropriate 

specialists; 

e. OCEANIA failed to properly monitor Mr. Detoro; 

f. OCEANIA failed to air-evacuate or expeditiously disembark 

Mr. Detoro from the ship so that he could promptly receive 

treatment; 

g. OCEANIA failed to timely divert the ship so that Mr. Detoro 

could promptly receive treatment; 

h. OCEANIA failed to evacuate Mr. Detoro by speed boat, tender 

boat, or transfer; 

i. OCEANIA failed to properly or timely consult qualified shorebased personnel regarding Mr. Detoro ’s condition; 

j. OCEANIA failed to obtain a proper medical opinion regarding Mr. 

Detoro ’s condition; 

k. OCEANIA failed to timely utilize “Telemedicine” and other 

resources on the vessel to properly assess Mr. Detoro’s condition; 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 18 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

19 

l. OCEANIA failed to develop and institute adequate procedures and 

policies to address Mr. Detoro ’s medical situation; 

m. OCEANIA failed to appreciate the severity of Mr. Detoro’s 

worsening condition; 

n. OCEANIA failed to perform any procedure to Mr. Detoro ’s 

medical benefit; 

o. OCEANIA failed to timely intubate and ventilate Mr. Detoro; 

p. OCEANIA negligently failed to monitor Mr. Detoro’s oxygen 

levels or analyze his blood gas; 

q. OCEANIA deviated from the standard of care for treating patients 

in Mr. Detoro’s condition. 

65. OCEANIA, through its medical personnel, knew or reasonably should have 

known about these conditions and failures, but failed to correct them prior to the incident that 

injured Plaintiff. These conditions and failures were longstanding and obvious to OCEANIA. 

66. As a direct and proximate result of OCEANIA breaching its duty to Mr. Detoro, 

suffered greatly and died. If Mr. Detoro had received appropriate care and treatment onboard or 

been timely evacuated from the ship, he would not have suffered such devastating injuries and 

died. 

COUNT V – NEGLIGENT HIRING / RETENTION 

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 – 41 of this Complaint. 

67. In light of OCEANIA’s experience and familiarity with the demographics of the 

passengers on its cruises, the onboard and offshore recreational activities taking place on its 

cruises, the foreign destinations visited on its cruises, and the illnesses experienced by past cruise 

passengers, it was reasonably foreseeable to OCEANIA Marina would have passengers similar 

in age to the Mr. Detoro, and passengers with common illnesses such as the Mr. Detoro’s 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 19 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

20 

condition. Likewise, it was reasonably foreseeable that such passengers would require proper 

examination, evaluation and treatment. 

68. OCEANIA owed Mr. Detoro the duty of exercising reasonable care to employ 

competent and fit medical personnel, including competent and fit doctors and nurses on board 

the Marina. However, Oceania’s doctor, Dr. Andrzej Gaszynski, M.D. was incompetent and 

unfit to perform the requisite examination, evaluation and treatment for passengers like Mr. 

Detoro, and OCEANIA knew or reasonably should have known that he was incompetent and 

unfit to do so. 

69. OCEANIA breached its duty by retaining and hiring an incompetent and unfit 

physician. For example, OCEANIA failed to conduct an appropriate background investigation to 

determine if Dr. Gaszynski was qualified by training and/or experience, and if he was capable of 

conducting an appropriate examination and/or evaluation for purposes of treatment or referral for 

appropriate treatment to a shore side facility. An appropriate investigation by OCEANIA would 

have revealed the incompetence or unfitness of Dr. Gaszynski to examine, evaluate, treat or refer 

to an appropriate shore side facility or physician to treat conditions such as those Mr. Detoro 

suffered from. It was unreasonable for OCEANIA to hire and retain Dr. Gaszynski in light of the 

information it knew or should have known. 

70. Specifically, OCEANIA knew that in 2015 it was sued along with Dr. Gaszynski 

(the same physician who provided negligent treatment to Mr. Detoro) for medical malpractice 

that occurred previously on the Marina in the case styled Kevin Bybee, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of Stephen Bybee v. Oceania Cruises, Inc and Andrzej Adam 

Gaszynski, M.D., Case No.: 1:15-cv-22239-JEM in the Southern District of Florida, Miami 

Division. At the time of the suit, Dr. Gaszynski worked for OCEANIA. The Bybee case also 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 20 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

21 

involved failing to render proper care and treatment to a guest suffering shortness of breath, 

difficulty breathing, and a heart attack. Despite actual knowledge of Dr. Gasynski’s documented 

negligence and failure to properly identify and timely and adequately treat patients with 

shortness of breath and difficulty breathing resulting in the previous death of a patient, 

OCEANIA continued to retain him and re-hired him for subsequent contracts as a ship physician. 

71. As a direct and proximate result of OCEANIA’s negligent retention and hiring of 

Dr. Gaszynski, OCEANIA allowed Dr. Gaszynski to provide negligent care to Mr. Detoro 

leading to his death. Had OCEANIA terminated Dr. Gaszynski after the previous medical 

malpractice case, he would not have been able to negligently treat Mr. Detoro in this case. 

72. OCEANIA physicians are hired on contracts that last less than a year. This means 

that since the 2015 malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Gaszynski, OCEANIA had to rehire or renew 

his contract multiple times and did so with actual knowledge of his incompetence and unfitness. 

73. OCEANIA breached its duty by hiring and then retaining Dr. Gaszynski knowing 

of his unfitness and failing to take further action such as investigating, discharging, or 

reassigning him. 

74. As a direct and proximate result of the incompetence or unfitness of OCEANIA’s 

physician Dr. Gaszynski, Mr. Detoro suffered severe injuries resulting in his wrongful death. If 

Dr. Gaszynski had been competent and fit, Mr. Detoro would have received appropriate care and 

treatment or been timely evacuated from the ship so that he would not have suffered such a 

devastating, irreversible injury resulting in his wrongful death. 

 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 21 of 22
Del Pino v. OCEANIA 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

22 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against 

OCEANIA for all damages recoverable under law. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all claims set forth herein. 

 

 Dated this 11th day of June, 2020. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

By: /s/ Thomas Scolaro 

 Thomas Scolaro (FBN 178276) 

 scolaro@leesfield.com

 Thomas D. Graham (FBN 89043) 

 graham@leesfield.com 

 LEESFIELD SCOLARO, P.A. 

 2350 South Dixie Highway 

 Miami, Florida 33133 

 Telephone: 305-854-4900 

 Facsimile: 305-854-8266 

 And 

 Aaron P. Davis (FBN 58463) 

advais@davisgoldman.com 

 DAVIS GOLDMAN, PLLC 

 Four Seasons Tower 

 1441 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1400 

 Miami, FL 33131 

 Telephone: 305-800-6673 

 Facsimile: 305-675-7880 

 

 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

Case 1:20-cv-22410-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/11/2020 Page 22 of 22