- 1 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. 

JILL PERL,

Plaintiff,

v.

OCEANIA CRUISES S. de R.L.

d/b/a OCEANIA CRUISES,

Defendant.

 /

COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR ADVISORY JURY

Plaintiff sues Defendant and alleges:

PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS

1. The Plaintiff, JILL PERL, is a citizen of Florida.

2. Defendant, OCEANIA CRUISES S. de R.L., d/b/a OCEANIA CRUISES., 

(“OCEANIA”), is a Panamanian limited liability company with its worldwide headquarters, 

principal address, and principal place of business at 7665 Corporate Center Drive, Miami, 

Florida 33126.

3. This matter is being filed pursuant to Defendant’s federal forum selection clause within 

its passenger ticket contract and, because there is no diversity among the parties, it is brought 

under the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the Court. This is an admiralty or maritime 

claim within the meaning of Rule 9(h).

a. Plaintiffs request an advisory jury trial pursuant to the remedies saved under the 

Saving to Suitors Clause of 28 U.S.C. §1333. See Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, 

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 1 of 9
- 2 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

Inc., 531 U.S. 438, 454-55 (2001) (“Trial by jury is an obvious... example of the 

remedies available to suitors.”); see also Suzuki of Orange Park, Inc. v. Shubert, 86 

F.3d 1060, 1063 (11th Cir. 1996). It is within the discretion of the court to allow for 

an advisory jury in an admiralty or maritime claim.

4. At all times material hereto, Defendant, personally or through an agent:

a. Operated, conducted, engaged in or carried on a business venture in this state and/or 

county or had an office or agency in this state and/or county;

b. Was engaged in substantial activity within this state; 

c. Operated vessels in the waters of this state; 

d. Committed one or more of the acts stated in Florida Statutes, Sections 48.081, 48.181 

or 48.193; 

e. The acts of Defendant set out in this Complaint occurred in whole or in part in this 

county and/or state; 

f. Defendant, as a common carrier, was engaged in the business of providing to the 

public and to Plaintiff in particular, for compensation, vacation cruises aboard the 

vessel Oceania Insignia.

5. At all times material hereto, Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction of the Courts of this 

state.

6. At all times material hereto, the causes of action asserted in this Complaint arise under 

the general maritime law of the United States.

7. At all times material hereto, Defendant owned, operated, managed, maintained, 

controlled, and/or had exclusive custody of the Oceania Insignia. (“the vessel”).

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 2 of 9
- 3 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

8. On or about July 26, 2019, Plaintiff was a paying passenger on the vessel, which was in 

navigable waters.

9. On or about July 26, 2019, Plaintiff entered an elevator on deck six and pressed the 

elevator button for deck nine when the elevator started shaking and/or jolting up and down. 

Plaintiff then pressed the elevator button for deck six, when suddenly the elevator malfunctioned 

as the elevator doors rapidly opened and the elevator jolted upwards, catapulting Plaintiff out of 

the elevator and onto deck six, causing Plaintiff to sustain severe injuries. 

COUNT I – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN AGAINST DEFENDANT

Plaintiff re-alleges, adopts and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through nine (9) as though alleged originally herein.

10. At all times material hereto, it was the duty of Defendant to provide Plaintiff with 

reasonable care under the circumstances.

11. At all times material hereto, it was the duty of Defendant to warn passengers (like 

Plaintiff) of dangers that were known, or reasonably should have been known, to Defendant in 

places where passengers (like Plaintiff) are invited to or may reasonably be expected to visit.

12. On or about July 26, 2019, the Plaintiff was on deck six inside a public elevator aboard 

Defendant’s vessel, which is a place that Plaintiff was invited to by Defendant and a place 

Defendant reasonably expected Plaintiff to be in during the cruise.

13. On or about July 26, 2019, Defendant and/or its agents, servants and/or employees 

breached its duty to warn the Plaintiff through the following acts and/or omissions:

a. Failure to warn the Plaintiff of the elevator’s dangerous conditions; and/or

b. Failure to warn the Plaintiff of the risks and/or dangers associated with the

malfunctioning elevator on deck six; and/or

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 3 of 9
- 4 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

c. Failure to warn passengers and the Plaintiff of other elevator-malfunction accidents 

previously occurring on the same elevator and/or the same type of elevator involved 

with Plaintiff’s incident.

14. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to the Plaintiff being severely 

injured because Plaintiff would not have used the malfunctioning elevator had Defendant and/or 

its agents, servants and/or employees adequately warned and/or communicated the foregoing to 

the Plaintiff.

15. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing dangerous conditions 

causing the Plaintiff’s incident and failed to correct and/or warn the Plaintiff about them, or the 

foregoing dangerous conditions existed for a sufficient length of time so that Defendant, in the 

exercise of reasonable care under the circumstances, should have learned of them and corrected 

and/or warned the Plaintiff about them. Insofar as it relates to conditions that Defendant did not 

create, Defendant’s knowledge was or should have been acquired through prior incident(s) 

and/or through its maintenance and/or inspections of the subject elevator(s).

16. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff was injured 

about Plaintiff’s body and extremities, suffered physical pain, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment 

of life, disability, disfigurement, aggravation of any previously existing conditions therefrom, 

incurred medical expenses in the care and treatment of Plaintiff’s injuries, suffered physical 

handicap. The injuries are permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will suffer the losses 

and impairments in the future. In addition, Plaintiff lost the benefit of Plaintiff’s vacation, 

cruise, and transportation costs.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment for all damages recoverable under the 

law against Defendant and requests trial with an advisory jury.

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 4 of 9
- 5 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

COUNT II – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AGAINST DEFENDANT

Plaintiff re-alleges, adopts and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through nine (9) as though alleged originally herein.

17. At all times material hereto, it was the duty of Defendant to provide Plaintiff with 

reasonable care under the circumstances.

18. At all times material hereto, it was the duty of Defendant to maintain elevators, including 

the elevator Plaintiff entered on deck six, in a reasonably safe condition.

19. On or about July 26, 2019, Defendant and/or its agents, servants and/or employees 

breached its duty through the following acts and/or omissions:

a. Failure to adequately and regularly inspect the elevators onboard to determine 

whether the elevators were reasonably safe for use and not malfunctioning; and/or

b. Failure to maintain the elevator, including the operating equipment, involved with 

Plaintiff’s incident in a reasonably safe condition in light of the anticipated and 

extensive use of the elevator; and/or 

c. Failure to adequately operate, maintain, and repair the mechanical and electrical 

systems of the elevator involved with Plaintiff’s incident, so as to avoid unreasonable 

hazards to passengers; and/or

d. Failure to promulgate and/or enforce reasonable policies and procedures with regard 

to adequately inspecting, operating, maintaining, and repairing the mechanical and 

electrical systems of the elevator involved with Plaintiff’s incident; and/or

e. Failure to adequately inspect and/or maintain the subject elevator in a reasonably safe 

condition; and/or

f. Failing to follow the manufacturer of the elevator’s instructions for maintaining the

electronical and mechanical equipment; and/or

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 5 of 9
- 6 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

g. Failure to promulgate and/or enforce adequate policies and procedures to inspect 

and/or maintain the subject elevator in a reasonably safe condition; and/or

h. Failure to eliminate and/or modify the hazard(s) which caused Plaintiff to suffer her 

accident.

20. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to the Plaintiff being severely 

injured because Plaintiff’s incident would not have occurred but for Defendant’s failure to 

adequately inspect and/or maintain the subject elevator.

23. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing dangerous conditions 

causing Plaintiff’s incident and did not correct them, or the conditions existed for a sufficient 

length of time so that Defendant, in the exercise of reasonable care under the circumstances, 

should have learned of them and corrected them. This knowledge was or should have been 

acquired through Defendant’s maintenance and/or inspections of the elevators aboard the subject 

vessel and/or through prior incidents involving passengers injured due to the wet floor in the 

subject area on Defendant’s vessels and/or Defendant’s similar vessels using the same flooring 

surface. 

24. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff was injured 

about Plaintiff’s body and extremities, suffered physical pain, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment 

of life, disability, disfigurement, aggravation of any previously existing conditions therefrom, 

incurred medical expenses in the care and treatment of Plaintiff’s injuries, and suffered physical 

handicap. The injuries are permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will suffer the losses 

and impairments in the future. In addition, Plaintiff lost the benefit of Plaintiff’s vacation, 

cruise, and transportation costs. Further, the injuries resulting from his fall are permanent or 

continuing in nature and Plaintiff will suffer these losses and impairments into the future.

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 6 of 9
- 7 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment for all damages recoverable under the 

law against Defendant and requests trial with an advisory jury.

COUNT III – GENERAL NEGLIGENCE AGAINST DEFENDANT

Plaintiff re-alleges, adopts and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through nine (9) as though alleged originally herein.

25. At all times material hereto, it was the duty of Defendant to provide Plaintiff with 

reasonable care under the circumstances.

26. On or about July 26, 2019, Defendant and/or its agents, servants and/or employees 

breached its duty to provide Plaintiff with reasonable care under the circumstances through the 

following acts and/or omissions:

a. Failure to adequately operate, maintain, and repair the mechanical and electrical 

systems of the elevator involved with Plaintiff’s incident, so as to avoid 

unreasonable hazards to passengers; and/or

b. Failure to provide instruction to the Plaintiff before and/or during the subject 

cruise with respect to malfunctioning elevators on board the subject vessel; and/or

c. Failure to promulgate and/or enforce reasonable policies and procedures with 

regard to warning passengers on the subject vessel of the dangerous conditions 

involved with elevators, including when it malfunctions; and/or

d. Failure to promulgate and/or enforce reasonable policies and procedures with 

regard to adequately inspecting, operating, maintaining, and repairing the 

mechanical and electrical systems on the elevator involved with Plaintiff’s 

incident; and/or

e. Failure to provide adequate training to the personnel inspecting, operating, 

maintaining, and repairing the mechanical and electrical systems of the elevators, 

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 7 of 9
- 8 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

so as to avoid unreasonable hazards to passengers; and/or

f. Failing to take the elevator off line until it was safe to use; and/or

g. Failing to follow reports and recommendations concerning safe operation of the 

elevator; and/or

h. Other acts or omissions constituting a breach of the duty to use reasonable care 

under the circumstances which are revealed through discovery.

27. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to the Plaintiff being severely 

injured because Plaintiff’s incident would not have occurred but for such acts and/or omissions.

28. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing dangerous conditions 

causing Plaintiff’s incident and did not correct them, or the conditions existed for a sufficient 

length of time so that Defendant, in the exercise of reasonable care under the circumstances, 

should have learned of them and corrected them. This knowledge was or should have been 

acquired through Defendant’s maintenance and/or inspections of elevators aboard the subject 

vessel and/or through prior incidents involving passengers injured due to the wet floor in the 

subject area on Defendant’s vessels and/or Defendant’s similar vessels using the same flooring 

surface.

29. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff was injured 

about Plaintiff’s body and extremities, suffered physical pain, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment 

of life, disability, disfigurement, aggravation of any previously existing conditions therefrom, 

incurred medical expenses in the care and treatment of Plaintiff’s injuries, suffered physical 

handicap, lost wages and Plaintiff’s working ability has been impaired. The injuries are 

permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will suffer the losses and impairments in the 

future. In addition, Plaintiff lost the benefit of Plaintiff’s vacation, cruise, and transportation 

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 8 of 9
- 9 -

L I P C O N , M A R G U L I E S , A L S I N A & W I N K L E M A N , P . A .

costs. Further, the injuries resulting from her fall are permanent or continuing in nature and 

Plaintiff will suffer these losses and impairments into the future.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment for all damages recoverable under the 

law against Defendant and requests trial with an advisory jury.

Respectfully submitted,

LIPCON, MARGULIES,

ALSINA & WINKLEMAN, P.A.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 1776

2 S. Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone No.: (305) 373-3016

Facsimile No.: (305) 373-6204

By: /s/ Michael A. Winkleman

MICHAEL A. WINKLEMAN

Florida Bar No. 36719

mwinkleman@lipcon.com

ANDREW S. FREEDMAN

Florida Bar No. 091087

afreedman@lipcon.com

DANIEL W. GRAMMES

Florida Bar No. 1010507

dgrammes@lipcon.com

Case 1:20-cv-22808-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/08/2020 Page 9 of 9