ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 1 of 32 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:22-cv-22784 

FRANKLIN GELL, 

Plaintiff,

v.

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, 

 Defendant. 

________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 

AND DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL (hereinafter “GELL”), through undersigned counsel, sues 

Defendant, CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, (hereinafter “CARNIVAL”), and demands trial 

by jury, stating as follows:

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

1. GELL seeks damages in excess of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest, costs, and 

attorneys’ fees.

2. This Court has admiralty and maritime jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1333. 

3. This Court has diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, as the matter in 

controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between 

citizens of different states and/or citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a foreign state. 

4. Suit is filed in federal court because of the federal forum selection clause in the 

passenger contract ticket issued by CARNIVAL. 

5. GELL is sui juris and is a resident and citizen of the state of Florida. 

6. CARNIVAL is a citizen of the state of Florida and the nation of Panama.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 1 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 2 of 32 

7. CARNIVAL is a foreign corporation who is authorized to conduct and who does 

conduct business in the state of Florida, who at all times material hereto was and is doing business 

in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and who maintains its corporate headquarters and principal place 

of business in Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

8. CARNIVAL, at all times material hereto, personally and/or through an agent, in 

Miami-Dade County, Florida, in the Southern District of Florida:

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

b. Had an office or agency; and/or 

c. Engaged in substantial activity; and/or

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

48.181 or 48.193. 

9. All conditions precedent for filing and maintaining this action have been fulfilled, have 

been waived, or do not apply.

DEFINITIONS AND FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

10. Hereinafter, the phrase, the “subject area,” shall include, but not be limited to, the surface

that GELL tripped on, the foreign substance on the subject surface, the surrounding area, the lighting 

in the area, and all material and effects pertaining thereto, including the design, visual condition, and/or 

any other material pertaining to the area. 

11. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL owned, leased, chartered, operated, 

maintained, managed, and/or controlled the subject cruise ship, the Spirit. 

12. GELL’S incident occurred on or about July 8, 2022, while he was a fare paying 

passenger on CARNIVAL’S vessel, the Spirit. 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 2 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 3 of 32

13. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL owned, leased, chartered, operated, 

maintained, managed, and/or controlled the subject area involved in GELL’S incident.

14. On or about July 8, 2022, at approximately 11:00 p.m., GELL was dancing in the

nightclub "Disco." There was a sticky foreign substance on the subject surface. However, the 

lighting was unreasonably dim such that he was unable to see this substance prior to stepping in 

it. While dancing, GELL’s feet got stuck on the subject surface, and his body spun.

15. As a result, his leg twisted, he fell to the ground, and he sustained severe injuries that 

include, but are not limited to, torn patellar tibular tendons on both legs.

16. He was taken to the ship’s medical center approximately thirty minutes after his 

incident, the ship’s doctor misdiagnosed the strength of the pulse in his right ankle and 

misdiagnosed him with a vascular injury. Therefore, the ship’s doctor ordered GELL to medically 

disembark from the ship and arranged to have him airlifted to a hospital in Juneau, Alaska. 

However, when GELL arrived at this hospital, he was informed that he did not have a vascular 

injury, such that GELL did not need to be transported to this hospital in Juneau, Alaska, thereby 

incurring additional pain, suffering, expenses, and/or other damages.

17. Moreover, GELL was prescribed an insufficient amount of pain medicine for his trip 

to the hospital in Juneau, Alaska, such that he was in great pain for a longer amount of time. 

Furthermore, when the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they did not switch him 

to a handicap room, and could not fit his stretcher through the door, such that GELL had to drag

himself from the hallway to his bed.

18. At all relevant times, the dangerous and/or risk creating conditions include, but are 

not limited to the following:

a. The foreign substance on the subject surface, which was unreasonably present 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 3 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 4 of 32

when GELL’s incident occurred, and which caused GELL’s feet to become 

stuck.

b. The subject surface was dark and it, as well as the surrounding area, lacked 

adequate visual cues (such as proper visual elements/coloring) to help 

passengers see foreign substances on the subject surface.

c. The unreasonable lack of policies and/or the unreasonable non-enforcement of 

such policies regarding the consumption, use, possession, and/or other such 

handling of drinks or other materials that could become foreign when dropped 

or left on the subject surface.

d. The unreasonable passenger crowding in the subject area, caused by 

CARNIVAL’S lack of reasonable crowd control.

e. There was inadequate lighting in the area and on the surface such that the area and 

surface were too dim and not properly lit, and GELL could not see the foreign

substance on the subject surface as a result.

f. Other dangerous conditions that will be revealed through discovery.

19. Each of these dangerous conditions alone was sufficient to cause GELL’S incident and 

injuries, and GELLis alleging that CARNIVAL was negligent as to each of these conditionsseparately 

and not cumulatively. 

20. CARNIVAL either knew or should have known of these risk-creating and/or 

dangerous conditions, due to reasons that include, but are not limited to, the following: 

a. GELL did not observe anyone spill anything in the subject area, and he was in the 

subject area for at least fifteen minutes prior to his incident, such that it is reasonable 

for the fact finder to infer that the foreign substance that was on the subject floor was 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 4 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 5 of 32

present for over fifteen minutes prior to GELL’s incident (and that the length of time 

this substance was on the subject surface caused it to become foreign), and 

CARNIVAL should have known of this substance had it performed reasonable 

inspections to keep its surfaces reasonably safe.

b. There was a yellow caution cone that stated something to the effect of “watch your 

step” or “slippery when wet” in the subject area.

c. Furthermore, GELL observed CARNIVAL’S crewmembers in the subject area at the 

time of the incident, and these crewmembers were in the immediate vicinity, such that 

GELL reasonably infers that these crew members regularly used, observed, and 

tended to the subject area, and therefore were or should have been aware of the 

dangerous and/or risk-creating conditions thereof, and warned of and/or removed 

these conditions, and/or more reasonably controlled the crowd.

d. CARNIVAL participated in the installation and/or design of the subject area, or 

alternatively, CARNIVAL accepted the area with its design defects present after 

having been given an opportunity to inspect the ship and materials on it, including the 

subject surface, such that CARNIVAL should have known of the design defects of the 

subject surface and area before providing them for public use. These design defects 

include, but are not limited to, the structural dangers outlined in paragraph 18 of this 

Complaint.

e. There are relevant safety standards/recommendations/other guidelines regarding the 

safety of the subject area, including, but not limited to, prohibitions and/or 

recommendations against the deficiencies discussed in paragraph 18 of this 

Complaint, and CARNIVAL should have known of these 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 5 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 6 of 32 

standards/recommendations/other guidelines because whether such 

standards/recommendations/other guidelines are legally required for CARNIVAL to 

comply with or not, a fact-finder is entitled to determine, if it so choses, that these 

standards/recommendations/other guidelines show what a reasonable Defendant 

should have done. 

f. CARNIVAL also knew or should have known of these dangerous conditions through 

inspecting the subject area involved in GELL’S incident, and if it did not know of 

these dangerous conditions, this was because CARNIVAL failed to adequately inspect 

the subject area prior to her incident. 

g. Previous passengers suffered prior incidents involving similar surfaces and/or other 

similar conditions as GELL. See, e.g., Bailey v. Carnival Corp., No. 06-21915-CIV, 

2007 WL 9703133, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 21, 2007) (citing Keefe v. Bahama Cruise 

Line, Inc., 867 F.2d 1318, 1322 (11th Cir. 1986)) (“[H]olding that actual or 

constructive notice of the risk creating situation was necessary for the shipowner to 

be liable where passenger slipped on slippery and foreign dance floor”) (emphasis 

added); see also Cogburn v. Carnival Corp., No. 21-11579, 2022 WL 1215196, at *1 

(11th Cir. Apr. 25, 2022) (“When Cogburn fell, her dress absorbed the puddle's liquid. 

The spot with the liquid felt a ‘little tacky’ and ‘[s]lightly foreign.’”) (emphasis 

added); see also 

h. Moreover, CARNIVAL knew or should have known of these dangerous conditions 

for other reasons that will be revealed through discovery. 

21. At all times relevant, the subject area was unreasonably dangerous, risk-creating, 

defective, improperly designed, improperly installed, and/or otherwise unsafe.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 6 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 7 of 32

22. The subject area and the vicinity lacked adequate safety features to prevent or minimize 

GELL’S incident and/or injuries.

23. These hazardous conditions were known, or should have been known, to CARNIVAL 

in the exercise of reasonable care.

24. These hazardous conditions existed for a period of time before the incident.

25. These conditions were neither open nor obvious to GELL.

26. At all times relevant, CARNIVAL failed to adequately inspect the subject area and the 

vicinity for dangers, and CARNIVAL failed to adequately warn GELL of the dangers.

27. At all times relevant, CARNIVAL had the ability to cure the deficiencies and to eliminate 

the hazards, but failed to do so.

28. At all times relevant, CARNIVAL failed to maintain the subject area and the vicinity in 

a reasonably safe condition.

29. At all timesrelevant, CARNIVAL participated in the design and/or approved the design 

of the subject area and the vicinity involved in GELL’S incident.

30. At all times relevant, CARNIVAL participated in the installation and/or approved the 

installation of the subject area and the vicinity involved in GELL’S incident.

31. The crewmembers of the Spirit were in regular full-time employment of CARNIVAL 

and/or the ship, as salaried crewmembers. 

32. CARNIVAL’s crewmembers, employees, and/or agents were subject to the ship’s 

discipline and master’s orders, and CARNIVAL had the right to hire and fire its crewmembers, 

employees, and/or agents.

33. CARNIVAL is directly responsible and liable for their actions and the actions of its

crewmembers, employees, and/or agents.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 7 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 8 of 32 

34. The crewmembers, including the medical staff, were employees and/or actual agents 

and/or apparent agents of CARNIVAL, and acted within the course and scope of their employment 

and/or agency agreement and/or relationship.

35. The crewmembers were represented to GELL and the ship’s passengers as employees 

of CARNIVAL through signs, documents, and/or uniforms. The crewmembers were also paid 

salary and/or hourly wage by CARNIVAL. CARNIVAL knew that the crewmembers represented 

themselves to be employees of CARNIVAL and allowed them to represent themselves as such. 

GELL detrimentally relied on these representations as GELL would not have proceeded on the 

subject cruise had he believed the crewmembers were not employees of CARNIVAL. 

COUNT I

NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO INSPECT 

36. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forthherein.

37. CARNIVAL owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances for the 

safety of its passengers. 

38. This duty includes, but is not limited to, the duty to provide its passengers reasonable 

care by adequately inspecting the subject area and the vicinity to make sure the subject area and 

the vicinity were reasonably safe for the use and enjoyment of its passengers.

39. At all times material, CARNIVAL, through its vessel, crew, agents, employees, staff 

and/or representatives, who were acting in the course and scope of their employment and/or agency 

with CARNIVAL breached the duty of reasonable care owed to GELL and were negligent by 

failing to adequately inspect the subject area and the vicinity to make sure the subject area and the 

vicinity were reasonably safe, such that the unreasonably risk creating and/or dangerous conditions 

discussed paragraph 18 of the instant Complaint were present at the time of GELL’S incident.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 8 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 9 of 32

40. CARNIVAL either knew or should have known of these risk-creating and/or 

dangerous conditions, due to reasons that include, but are not limited to, the reasons discussed in 

paragraph 20 of the instant Complaint.

41. These risk-creating and/or dangerous conditions were caused by CARNIVAL’S

failure to adequately inspect the subject area and the vicinity to make sure the subject area and the 

vicinity were reasonably safe.

42. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

43. CARNIVAL’S negligence proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL’S injuries would not have occurred.

44. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

45. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature.

46. GELL suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in the 

future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 9 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 10 of 32 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT II

NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO MAINTAIN 

47. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

48. CARNIVAL owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances for the

safety of its passengers. 

49. This duty includes, but is not limited to, the duty to provide its passengers reasonable

care by adequately maintaining the subject area and the vicinity.

50. At all times material, CARNIVAL, through its vessel, crew, agents, employees, staff

and/or representatives, who were acting in the course and scope of their employment and/or agency

with CARNIVAL, breached the duty of reasonable care owed to GELL and were negligent by

failing to adequately maintain the subject area and the vicinity, such that the unreasonably risk 

creating and/or dangerous conditions discussed paragraph 18 of the instant Complaint were present 

at the time of GELL’S incident.

51. CARNIVAL either knew or should have known of these risk-creating and/or 

dangerous conditions, due to reasons that include, but are not limited to, the reasons discussed in 

paragraph 20 of the instant complaint.

52. Moreover, these risk-creating and/or dangerous conditions were caused by

CARNIVAL’S failure to adequately maintain the subject area and the vicinity.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 10 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 11 of 32 

53. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

54. CARNIVAL’S negligence proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but

for CARNIVAL’S negligence, her injuries would not have occurred. 

55. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

56. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature. 

57. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such losses in 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT III

NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO REMEDY 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 11 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 12 of 32

58. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein.

59. CARNIVAL owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances for the 

safety of its passengers.

60. This duty includes, but is not limited to, the duty to provide its passengers reasonable 

care by adequately remedying the subject area and the vicinity.

61. At all times material, CARNIVAL, through its vessel, crew, agents, employees, staff 

and/or representatives, who were acting in the course and scope of their employment and/or agency 

with CARNIVAL, breached the duty of reasonable care owed to GELL and were negligent by 

failing to adequately remedy the subject area and the vicinity, such that the unreasonably risk 

creating and/or dangerous conditions discussed in paragraph 18 of the instant Complaint were 

present at the time of GELL’S incident.

62. CARNIVAL either knew or should have known of these risk-creating and/or 

dangerous conditions, due to reasons that include, but are not limited to, the reasons discussed in 

paragraph 20 of the instant Complaint.

63. Moreover, these risk-creating and/or dangerous conditions were caused 

CARNIVAL’S failure to adequately remedy the subject area.

64. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

65. CARNIVAL’S negligence proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S negligence, her injuries would not have occurred.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 12 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 13 of 32 

66. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

67. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature.

68. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such losses in 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT IV 

NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN OF DANGEROUS CONDITION

69. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

70. At all times relevant, CARNIVAL owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the 

circumstances for the safety of its passengers, including GELL. 

71. Such duty includes, but is not limited to, the duty that CARNIVAL owes to warn 

passengers of any dangers that it knew or should have known were not open and obvious to GELL. 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 13 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 14 of 32

72. Such duty also includes, but is not limited to, the duty to warn passengers of hazards,

which passengers may reasonably be expected to encounter.

73. Furthermore, CARNIVAL knew or should have known of these dangerous conditions 

for the reasons discussed in paragraph 20 of this Complaint.

74. These dangerous conditions were also created by CARNIVAL.

75. CARNIVAL failed to adequately ensure there were no dangerous conditions that 

passengers needed to be warned of, and/or CARNIVAL failed to warn GELL despite knowing of 

the dangers.

76. These dangerous conditions existed for a period of time before the incident. 

77. These conditions were neither open nor obvious to GELL. 

78. CARNIVAL’S breach was the cause in-fact of GELL’S great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S breach her injuries would not have occurred.

79. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

80. CARNIVAL’S breach proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that the 

incident that occurred was a foreseeable result of CARNIVAL’S breach.

81. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 14 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 15 of 32 

82. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature. 

83. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

the future. 

 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate.

COUNT V 

NEGLIGENT DESIGN, INSTALLATION, AND/OR APPROVAL OF THE SUBJECT 

AREA AND THE VICINITY

84. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

85. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL owed a duty to its passengers, and in 

particular a duty to GELL, not to permit dangerous conditions to be in places where they could 

harm passengers, such as those discussed in paragraph 18 in the instant Complaint, as well as to 

design and install reasonable safeguards. 

86. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL participated in the design process of the 

subject vessel by generating design specifications for the shipbuilder to follow, and to put the 

vessel on which GELL was injured into the channels of trade, and/or CARNIVAL approved of the 

subject vessel’s design, including the design of the subject area and the vicinity.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 15 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 16 of 32

87. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL manufactured, designed, installed, and/or 

approved of the Spirit , including providing specifications to the shipbuilder in the original build 

process, and/or during its refurbishments, and as such owed a duty to its passengers, and in 

particular a duty to GELL, to design, install and/or approve of the subject area and the vicinity 

without any defects.

88. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL through its agents and/or employees who 

were acting in the course and scope of their employment and/or agency with CARNIVAL, 

designed, installed, and/or approved of the subject area and the vicinity involved in GELL’S

incident, which was also in violation of the applicable industry standards/recommendations and/or 

other guidelines.

89. CARNIVAL provides design elements of the vessels to the ship builder and/or 

approves of design elements which include the subject area and the vicinity.

90. CARNIVAL maintains the contractual right to participate, review, modify, and/or 

reject the design plans and drawings of the vessels, including the Spirit , during the new build 

process.

91. CARNIVAL has the right to enter the ship and inspect it during construction to ensure 

that it is being constructed in accordance with the design specifications and has a right to insist on 

changes when safety concerns are identified.

92. CARNIVAL has the right to inspect and reject design elements before taking 

possession of the ship.

93. However, CARNIVAL permitted the dangerous conditions discussed in paragraph 18

of the instant complaint to be present in the subject area and the vicinity without correcting these 

design deficiencies and did not design and install reasonable safeguards.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 16 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 17 of 32

94. Furthermore, CARNIVAL knew or should have known of these dangerous conditions 

for the reasons discussed in paragraph 20 of this Complaint.

95. The design flaws that made the subject area and the vicinity involved in GELL’S

incident unreasonably dangerous were the direct and proximate cause of GELL’S injuries.

96. CARNIVAL is liable for the design flaws of the vessel, including of the subject area 

and the vicinity involved in GELL’S incident, which it knew or should have known of.

97. CARNIVAL failed to correct and/or remedy the defective conditions, despite the fact 

that CARNIVAL knew or should have known of the danger(s).

98. CARNIVAL’S breach was the cause in-fact of GELL’S great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S breach her injuries would not have occurred.

99. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

100. CARNIVAL’S breach proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that the 

incident that occurred was a foreseeable result of CARNIVAL’S breach.

101. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

102. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature.

103. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 17 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 18 of 32 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT VI

NEGLIGENCE FOR THE ACTS OF CARNIVAL’S CREW, STAFF, EMPLOYEES, 

AND/OR AGENTS, BASED ON VICARIOUS LIABILITY 

104. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

105. CARNIVAL owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances for the 

safety of its passengers. 

106. The crewmembers who were working in and/or who were and/or should have been 

responsible for inspecting, maintaining, cleaning, and/or securing the subject area, including 

specifically the crewmembers who were responsible for crowd control in the subject area, were 

agents of CARNIVAL for the following reasons: 

a. They were the staff and/or employees of CARNIVAL, or were CARNIVAL’S

agents, apparent agents, and/or servants; and/or 

b. These staff, employees, and/or agents were subject to the right of control by

CARNIVAL; and/or 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 18 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 19 of 32

c. These staff, employees, and/or agents were acting within the scope of their 

employment or agency; and/or

d. CARNIVAL acknowledged that these staff, employees, and/or agents would act on

CARNIVAL’S behalf, and they accepted the undertaking.

107. CARNIVAL is vicariously liable for the acts of its staff, employees, and/or agents, as 

discussed in paragraph 18 of the instant complaint.

108. CARNIVAL’S breach was the cause in-fact of GELL’S great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S breach her injuries would not have occurred.

109. Furthermore, the subject area and the vicinity were also on a cruise ship in the water 

subject to numerous maritime conditions such as the ship’s movement, additional wear-and-tear 

due to maritime conditions not necessarily present on land, waves, and other conditions unique to 

maritime travel, and as such were “clearly linked to nautical adventure.”

110. This negligence proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but for this 

negligence, GELL’S injuries would not have occurred.

111. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

112. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature.

113. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

the future.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 19 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 20 of 32 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT VII

VICARIOUS LIABILITY AGAINST CARNIVAL FOR THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE 

SHIP’S MEDICAL STAFF

114. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

115. CARNIVAL, through the ship’s medical staff (including its physicians and nurses), 

and the ship’s crew, owed a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances for the safety 

of its passengers. 

116. Such duties include, but are not limited to, providing such medical care and assistance 

as would an ordinarily prudent person under the circumstances.

117. At all times material, the ship’s medical staff (including its physicians and nurses), 

and the ship’s crew, were full-time employees and agents of CARNIVAL, subject to its direction 

and control, who were engaged in the activity of discharging CARNIVAL’S obligation to make 

such medical aid and assistance available to its passengers as would an ordinarily prudent person 

under the circumstances.

118. CARNIVAL is estopped to deny that the ship’s medical staff (including its physicians 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 20 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 21 of 32

and nurses), and the ship’s crew, were its agents and/or employees and/or servants.

119. CARNIVAL directly paid the ship’s medical personnel and regular crew a salary (i.e., 

payment by time) for their work in the ship’s hospital and in treating passengers.

120. CARNIVAL created, owned, directly provided, and operated, the medical center to 

be used by the ship’s medical personnel and passengers.

121. CARNIVAL pays to stock the medical center with all supplies, medical machinery, 

various medicines, and equipment to be used therein, regularly stocking and restocking same.

122. CARNIVAL collected all medical revenues directly from passengers and generated 

a profit on the sale of medical services, supplies, and equipment made by the ship’s medical 

personnel to the passengers of the vessel.

123. CARNIVAL’S marketing materials described the infirmary in proprietary language.

124. The ship’s medical personnel were members of the ship’s crew; they were subject to 

the ship’s discipline; they were required to wear the ship’s uniforms; they (and, in particular, the 

ship’s physicians) were members of the ship’s officer’s compliment, and at all times they were 

subject to termination, or other discipline, by CARNIVAL.

125. CARNIVAL provided the ship’s medical personnel and regular crew certain forms 

of liability insurance and/or indemnification rights.

126. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL, through the ship’s medical staff (including 

its physicians and nurses), and the ship’s crew, was careless, negligent, and breached its duties as 

follows: 

a. The ship’s doctor misdiagnosed the strength of the pulse in GELL’s right 

ankle and misdiagnosed him with a serious vascular injury. 

b. The ship’s doctor rushed GELL to get him off the ship and arranged to have 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 21 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 22 of 32

him airlifted to a hospital in Juneau, Alaska. However, when GELL arrived 

at this hospital, he was informed that he did not have a vascular injury, such 

that GELL did not need to be transported to this hospital in Juneau, Alaska, 

thereby incurring additional pain, suffering, expenses, and/or other 

damages.

c. GELL was prescribed an insufficient amount of pain medicine for his trip 

to the hospital in Juneau, Alaska, such that he was in great pain for a longer 

amount of time.

d. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they did not 

switch him to a handicap room

e. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they could not 

fit his stretcher through the door, such that GELL had to drag himself from 

the hallway to his bed.

f. CARNIVAL failed to promptly provide GELL with proper medical and/or 

first aid care and attention.

g. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly attend to GELL, to his injuries,

and to his pain.

h. CARNIVAL failed to provide reasonable medical and/or first aidcare.

i. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly treat and care for GELL.

j. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly examine GELL’S injuries.

k. CARNIVAL failed to take proper measures to secure proper treatment for

GELL, including unreasonably delaying taking measures to secure such 

proper treatment.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 22 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 23 of 32

l. CARNIVAL failed to properly bring and/or arrange for GELL to be brought 

to a reasonable hospital/emergency room within a reasonable amount of 

time.

m. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL proper discharge instructions.

n. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL adequate pain medicine.

127. Pain is a frequently experienced, yet oftentimes overlooked factor in wound care and 

wound healing. It is undeniable that pain affects wound care practice, and unresolved pain 

negatively impacts both wound healing and a patient's quality of life.

128. Under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior, employers are vicariously liable for the 

negligent acts or omissions by their employees and/or other agents within the course of their 

employment and/or agency.

129. CARNIVAL is therefore vicariously liable for all injuries and damages sustained by 

GELL as a result of the negligence of the ship’s medical staff (including its physicians and nurses), 

and the ship’s crew.

130. At all times material hereto, the aforementioned acts and/or omissions on the part of

CARNIVAL’S ship’s medical staff (including its physicians and nurses), and the ship’s crew, fell 

below the standard of care.

131. The negligence of CARNIVAL’S ship’s medical staff (including its physicians and 

nurses), and the ship’s crew, proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but for 

CARNIVAL negligence, GELL’S injuries would not have occurred and/or said injuries would 

have been substantially lessened.

132. CARNIVAL, through its employees and agents, including the ship’s medical staff, 

knew or should have known that the medical procedures they employed violated and/or did not 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 23 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 24 of 32 

meet reasonable standards of medical care.

133. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

134. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature. 

135. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT VIII

APPARENT AGENCY

FOR THE ACTS OF THE SHIP’S MEDICAL STAFF

136. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35, as if set forth herein. 

137. At all times material hereto, the ship’s medical staff and regular crew represented to

GELL and to the ship’s passengers as employees and/or agents and/or servants of CARNIVAL, in 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 24 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 25 of 32

that:

a. The medical staff wore a ship’s uniform;

b. The medical staff ate with the ship’s crew;

c. The medical staff was under the commands of the ship’s officers;

d. The medical staff worked in the ship’s medical department;

e. The medical staff was paid a salary by CARNIVAL;

f. The medical staff worked aboard the vessel;

g. The medical staff spoke to GELL as though they had authority to do so by CARNIVAL.

138. In addition, CARNIVAL further represented to GELL that the vessel’s medical staff 

and regular crew were agents and/or employees of CARNIVAL through its marketing materials 

and through other official statements that described the infirmary in proprietary language, 

including language such as the “Carnival Spirit’s Medical Center/our infirmary/our medical 

center,” and through encouraging GELL to make use of “its” infirmary/medical center if GELL

was in need of medical attention.

139. Furthermore, at no time did CARNIVAL represent to GELL in particular, or the 

ship’s passengers in general, in a meaningful way that the vessel’s medical staff and regular crew 

were not agents or employees of CARNIVAL.

140. At all material times, GELL reasonably relied on the representations to GELL’S

detriment that the medical staff and regular crew were employees, and/or agents, and/or servants 

of CARNIVAL.

141. It was reasonable to believe that the medical staff and regular crew were 

CARNIVAL’S agents because they wore a ship’s uniform. In addition, at all times material, the 

medical staff spoke and acted as though they were authorized to do so by CARNIVAL.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 25 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 26 of 32

142. This reasonable reliance was detrimental because it delayed GELL from receiving 

proper medical treatment and/or GELL would not have gone on the subject cruise with 

CARNIVAL had GELL known that the medical staff and regular crew on the ship were not 

CARNIVAL’S agents.

143. CARNIVAL is estopped to deny that the medical staff and regular crew were its 

apparent agents, and/or apparent employees, and/or apparent servants.

144. CARNIVAL had a duty to provide GELL with reasonable care under the 

circumstances and through the acts of its apparent agents breached its duty to provide GELL with 

reasonable care under the circumstances.

145. GELL’S injuries were aggravated due to the fault and/or negligence of CARNIVAL

through the acts of its apparent agents as follows:

a. The ship’s doctor misdiagnosed the strength of the pulse in GELL’s right 

ankle and misdiagnosed him with a serious vascular injury. 

b. The ship’s doctor rushed GELL to get him off the ship and arranged to have 

him airlifted to a hospital in Juneau, Alaska. However, when GELL arrived 

at this hospital, he was informed that he did not have a vascular injury, such 

that GELL did not need to be transported to this hospital in Juneau, Alaska, 

thereby incurring additional pain, suffering, expenses, and/or other 

damages.

c. GELL was prescribed an insufficient amount of pain medicine for his trip 

to the hospital in Juneau, Alaska, such that he was in great pain for a longer 

amount of time.

d. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they did not 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 26 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 27 of 32

switch him to a handicap room

e. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they could not 

fit his stretcher through the door, such that GELL had to drag himself from 

the hallway to his bed.

f. CARNIVAL failed to promptly provide GELL with proper medical and/or 

first aid care and attention.

g. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly attend to GELL, to his injuries, 

and to his pain.

h. CARNIVAL failed to provide reasonable medical and/or first aidcare.

i. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly treat and care for GELL.

j. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly examine GELL’S injuries.

k. CARNIVAL failed to take proper measures to secure proper treatment for

GELL, including unreasonably delaying taking measures to secure such 

proper treatment.

l. CARNIVAL failed to properly bring and/or arrange for GELL to be brought 

to a reasonable hospital/emergency room within a reasonable amount of 

time.

m. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL proper discharge instructions.

n. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL adequate pain medicine.

146. Pain is a frequently experienced, yet oftentimes overlooked factor in wound care and 

wound healing. It is undeniable that pain affects wound care practice, and unresolved pain 

negatively impacts both wound healing and a patient's quality of life.

147. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 27 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 28 of 32 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

148. The losses are either permanent or continuing in nature.

149. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

COUNT IX

ASSUMPTION OF DUTY FOR THE

NEGLIGENCE OF THE SHIP’S MEDICAL STAFF

150. GELL hereby adopts and re-alleges each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 

35 as if set forth herein. 

151. CARNIVAL owed GELL the duty to exercise reasonable care under the 

circumstances for the safety of its passengers.

152. Such duties include, but are not limited to, providing such medical care and assistance 

as would an ordinarily prudent person under the circumstances. 

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 28 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 29 of 32

153. CARNIVAL elected to discharge this duty by having GELL seen by its own ship’s 

physicians and/or other crew members.

154. As such, CARNIVAL voluntarily assumed a duty for the benefit of GELL to use 

reasonable care in the provision of medical services to GELL.

155. At all times material hereto, CARNIVAL, through the ship’s medical staff (including 

its physicians and nurses), and the ship’s crew, was careless, negligent, and breached its duties as 

follows:

a. The ship’s doctor misdiagnosed the strength of the pulse in GELL’s right 

ankle and misdiagnosed him with a serious vascular injury. 

b. The ship’s doctor rushed GELL to get him off the ship and arranged to have 

him airlifted to a hospital in Juneau, Alaska. However, when GELL arrived 

at this hospital, he was informed that he did not have a vascular injury, such 

that GELL did not need to be transported to this hospital in Juneau, Alaska, 

thereby incurring additional pain, suffering, expenses, and/or other 

damages.

c. GELL was prescribed an insufficient amount of pain medicine for his trip 

to the hospital in Juneau, Alaska, such that he was in great pain for a longer 

amount of time.

d. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they did not 

switch him to a handicap room

e. When the ship’s medical staff took GELL back to his cabin, they could not 

fit his stretcher through the door, such that GELL had to drag himself from 

the hallway to his bed.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 29 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 30 of 32

f. CARNIVAL failed to promptly provide GELL with proper medical and/or 

first aid care and attention.

g. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly attend to GELL, to his injuries, 

and to his pain.

h. CARNIVAL failed to provide reasonable medical and/or first aidcare.

i. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly treat and care for GELL.

j. CARNIVAL failed to timely and properly examine GELL’S injuries.

k. CARNIVAL failed to take proper measures to secure proper treatment for

GELL, including unreasonably delaying taking measures to secure such 

proper treatment.

l. CARNIVAL failed to properly bring and/or arrange for GELL to be brought 

to a reasonable hospital/emergency room within a reasonable amount of 

time.

m. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL proper discharge instructions.

n. CARNIVAL failed to give GELL adequate pain medicine.

156. At all times material hereto, the aforementioned acts or omissions on the part of 

CARNIVAL fell below the standard of care.

157. CARNIVAL’S negligence proximately caused GELL great bodily harm in that, but 

for CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL’S injuries would not have occurred, would have been 

substantially lessened, and/or would not have been aggravated.

158. CARNIVAL, through its employees and agents, to wit, the ship’s medical staff and 

regular crew, knew, or should have known, that the medical and first aid procedures they employed 

violated reasonable standards of medical care.

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 30 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com 

Page 31 of 32 

159. As a result of CARNIVAL’S negligence, GELL has suffered severe bodily injuries 

resulting in pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of 

independence, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense 

of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and loss of the value of GELL’S

vacation, cruise, and transportation costs.

160. The losses are permanent and/or continuing in nature. 

161. GELL has suffered these losses in the past and will continue to suffer such loses in 

the future. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands judgment against Defendant, 

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC, for damages suffered and costs incurred, as well as for 

damages and costs that GELL will suffer and incur in the future, as a result of her bodily injury, 

pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, scarring, mental anguish, hospitalization, medical 

care and treatment, nursing care and treatment, lost wages, lost earning capacity, loss of the value 

of GELL’S vacation, cruise, transportation costs, loss of important bodily functions, loss of 

independence, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; for all court costs, pre- and postjudgment interest, and for any and all other relief which this Court deems just or appropriate. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, FRANKLIN GELL, demands trial by jury on all issues so triable. 

Dated: September 1, 2022. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Matthias M. Hayashi 

Spencer M. Aronfeld, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 905161

aronfeld@Aronfeld.com 

Matthias M. Hayashi

Florida Bar No.: 115973

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 31 of 32
ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

Aronfeld.com

Page 32 of 32

mhayashi@aronfeld.com

Abby H. Ivey, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 1002774

aivey@aronfeld.com

ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

One Alhambra Plaza, Penthouse

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

P: (305) 441.0440

F: (305) 441.0198

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 1:22-cv-22784-JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2022 Page 32 of 32