- 1 -

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.

PEDRO GUERRERO,

Plaintiff,

v.

NCL (BAHAMAS) LTD.,

Defendant.

/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

The Plaintiff sues Defendant and alleges:

PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS

1. The Plaintiff, PEDRO GUERRERO, is a citizen of the state of Florida. 

2. Defendant, NCL (BAHAMAS) LTD. (“Defendant”), is a corporation incorporated in 

Bermuda with its principal place of business in Miami, Florida. 

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. Plaintiff requests 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, 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, 

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 1 of 9
- 2 -

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

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 §§ 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 was engaged in the business of providing to the public and to Plaintiff in 

particular, for compensation, vacation cruises aboard the cruise ships.

5. Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state.

6. The causes of action asserted in this Complaint arise under the General Maritime Law of 

the United States.

7. Defendant NCL, as a common carrier, was engaged in the business of providing to the public 

and to the Plaintiff in particular, for compensation, vacation cruises aboard the vessel, Gem.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

8. At all times material hereto, Defendant owned, operated, managed, maintained and/or 

controlled the vessel, the Gem (“the vessel”).

9. At all times material hereto, Defendant had exclusive custody and control of the vessel.

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 2 of 9
- 3 -

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

10. On or about August 16, 2021, Plaintiff was a paying passenger aboard the vessel, which 

was in navigable waters. 

11. On or about the evening of August 16, 2021, the Plaintiff was descending an interior 

staircase located aboard the vessel, when he fell down stairs and sustained severe injuries.

COUNT I – GENERAL NEGLIGENCE

The Plaintiff realleges, adopts, and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through eleven (11) as though alleged originally herein.

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

reasonable care under the circumstances.

13. On or about the above date, Defendant and/or its agents, servants, and/or employees 

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

the following acts and/or omissions:

a. Failure to provide and/or utilize a reasonably safe stairway and walking/flooring 

surface in light of the anticipated use of the subject steps; and/or

b. Failure to provide adequate lighting on or near the subject stairway;

c. Failure to provide adequate handrails on the subject stairway; and/or

d. Failure to identify the dangerous and/or hazardous condition(s) which caused Plaintiff 

to fall; and/or

e. Failure to use contrasting colors and patterns on the steps and/or landings to adequately 

mark the change in level of each step; and/or

f. Failure to utilize a reasonably safe flooring surface without unmarked and/or hidden raised 

thresholds in light of the anticipated traffic and anticipated purpose of the area; and/or

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 3 of 9
- 4 -

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

g. Failure to properly mark the hazards in the area so as to adequately call passengers 

attention to them; and/or

h. Failure to correct hazardous conditions following prior trip and/or slip-and-fall

incidents on the same or similar steps, decks, and/or type of flooring surface; and/or

i. Failure to incorporate applicable standards, including the ASTM and/or the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA), to changes in levels open to passengers like the Plaintiff; and/or 

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

circumstances which are revealed through discovery.

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

injured because Plaintiff would not have been injured but for the above acts and/or omissions. 

15. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing conditions causing Plaintiff’s 

incident and did not correct them. Defendant’s knowledge of the foregoing condition(s) was 

specifically acquired through (a) its cleaning and/or inspection of the subject area prior to this 

incident, and/or (b) prior incidents causing personal injury to Defendant’s passengers in the same 

or substantially similar area. See generally Bradberry v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., et al., Case No. 21-

cv-20477-RNS (S.D. Fla. 2021) (fall interior staircase); Priddy v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No.

10-cv-24321-UU (S.D. Fla. 2010) (fall interior staircase); Starosta v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case 

No. 16-cv-20667-RNS (S.D. Fla. 2016) (fall interior staircase); Lipschultz v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., 

Case No. 11-cv-21595-JAL (S.D. Fla. 2011) (fall interior staircase); Michalski, Liz - May 21, 2016 

(no lawsuit filed, fall interior staircase). Alternatively, the foregoing 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.

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 4 of 9
- 5 -

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

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

COUNT II – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN

The Plaintiff realleges, adopts, and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through eleven (11) 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 warn passengers (like the 

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

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

19. On or about the above date, the Plaintiff was on an interior staircase 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.

20. On or about the above date, Defendant and/or its agents, servants, and/or employees 

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

the following acts and/or omissions:

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 5 of 9
- 6 -

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

a. Failure to adequately warn the Plaintiff of the dangers posed by the steps; and/or

b. Failure to adequately warn the Plaintiff of the existence of trip-and-fall/slip-and-fall/hazardous

conditions on the steps, such as raised metal edge(s) and/or metal strip(s); and/or

c. Failure to adequately warn passengers and Plaintiff of other fall accidents previously 

occurring on the same steps and adjacent deck area; and/or

d. Failure to promulgate and/or enforce adequate policies and procedures to ensure that 

passengers like the Plaintiff are warned of the danger posed by the steps.

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

injured because Plaintiff would not have been injured had Defendant and/or its agents, servants 

and/or employees adequately warned and/or communicated the foregoing to the Plaintiff. 

22. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing conditions causing Plaintiff’s 

incident and did not correct them. Defendant’s knowledge of the foregoing condition(s) was specifically 

acquired through (a) its cleaning and/or inspection of the subject area prior to this incident, and/or (b) 

prior incidents causing personal injury to Defendant’s passengers in the same or substantially similar 

area. See generally Bradberry v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., et al., Case No. 21-cv-20477-RNS (S.D. Fla. 

2021) (fall interior staircase); Priddy v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 10-cv-24321-UU (S.D. Fla. 2010) 

(fall interior staircase); Starosta v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 16-cv-20667-RNS (S.D. Fla. 2016) 

(fall interior staircase); Lipschultz v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 11-cv-21595-JAL (S.D. Fla. 2011) 

(fall interior staircase); Michalski, Liz - May 21, 2016 (no lawsuit filed, fall interior staircase). 

Alternatively, the foregoing 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.

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

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

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 6 of 9
- 7 -

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

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 the 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, the 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.

COUNT III – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO MAINTAIN

The Plaintiff realleges, adopts, and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 

one (1) through eleven (11) as though alleged originally herein.

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

reasonable care under the circumstances.

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

the subject staircase, in a reasonably safe condition.

26. On or about the above date, Defendant and/or its agents, servants, and/or employees 

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

the following acts and/or omissions:

a. Failure to maintain the subject area free of trip-and-fall/slip-and-fall hazards; and/or

b. Failure to maintain the subject steps and adjacent landings free of trip-and-fall/slipand-fall hazards; and/or

c. Failure to maintain the subject metal edge(s) and/or metal strip(s) of the subject steps 

in a manner that was flush with the steps and not raised and/or hazardous; and/or

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 7 of 9
- 8 -

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

d. Failure to adequately inspect the area where Plaintiff’s incident occurred for 

slipping/tripping hazards; and/or

e. Failure to adequately, timely, and regularly inspect and maintain the subject steps in a 

reasonably safe condition, including, but not limited to, in a clean and dry condition 

and free of trip-and-fall hazards; and/or

f. Failure to adequately, timely, and regularly inspect and maintain the subject metal edge(s) 

and/or metal strip(s) of the subject steps in a reasonably safe condition, including, but not 

limited to, in a manner that was flush with the steps and not raised and/or hazardous; and/or

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

the subject area is adequately and regularly inspected, monitored, cleaned and 

maintained free of trip-and-fall hazards; and/or

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

maintain the subject steps in a reasonably safe condition.

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 Defendant’s failure to 

adequately inspect and/or maintain the subject area.

28. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew of the foregoing conditions causing Plaintiff’s 

incident and did not correct them. Defendant’s knowledge of the foregoing condition(s) was specifically 

acquired through (a) its cleaning and/or inspection of the subject area prior to this incident, and/or (b) 

prior incidents causing personal injury to Defendant’s passengers in the same or substantially similar 

area. See generally Bradberry v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., et al., Case No. 21-cv-20477-RNS (S.D. Fla. 

2021) (fall interior staircase); Priddy v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 10-cv-24321-UU (S.D. Fla. 2010) 

(fall interior staircase); Starosta v NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 16-cv-20667-RNS (S.D. Fla. 2016) 

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 8 of 9
- 9 -

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

(fall interior staircase); Lipschultz v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., Case No. 11-cv-21595-JAL (S.D. Fla. 2011) 

(fall interior staircase); Michalski, Liz - May 21, 2016 (no lawsuit filed, fall interior staircase). 

Alternatively, the foregoing 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.

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

Dated: July 26, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

LIPCON, MARGULIES

& 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

MARC E. WEINER

Florida Bar No. 91699

mweiner@lipcon.com

Case 1:22-cv-22326-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2022 Page 9 of 9