“...are evidence that the cruise line was not acting negligently.”
They only reduced the speed to get through the early part of the evening for the show and they did not do the late performance. After the show, they strongly invited everyone to call it a night by closing up everything and asking people to retire. And the midnight chow was cancelled. They had to make their first port on time, so they increased speed to make up for the lost time thus going even faster than normal into a rough sea area they knew about even before they left Seattle. And you call that responsibility when the only actions they took was to try to fool people into thinking it was never going to be a problem they already knew was going to happen? That’s called irresponsibility. In court jargon, it’s called malfeasance.
“... see if they think you have a case.”
I guess you didn’t read the site I gave you as one of the cases collected on was when a woman fell over a raise bulkhead exit and collected. I wasn’t injured but with one bruise on my head over my eye when I hit the head of the bed. And that falls under pain and suffering which refers to the physical discomfort and emotional distress that are compensable as noneconomic damages. It refers to the pain, discomfort, anguish, inconvenience, and emotional trauma that accompanies an injury. Tack that on to malfeasance and it could have been worth a good chunk of change. But I don’t live my life from simple cuts and bruises like many. And yes, I had a winable case if compared to the ones I displayed for you.
I have no idea who you are and who you are representing. But defending anyone that did the things they did on my trip concerning the legal presidence already sets and used since indicates to me that you are setting a standard you believe and are expecting me to cut it to shreds a piece at a time starting with you can’t moving on to okay try it. Wastes my time. I’m not going to go from A to Z. So long.
wy69
whitney69 wrote: “I have no idea who you are and who you are representing. But defending anyone that did the things they did on my trip concerning the legal presidence already sets and used since indicates to me that you are setting a standard you believe and are expecting me to cut it to shreds a piece at a time starting with you can’t moving on to okay try it. Wastes my time. I’m not going to go from A to Z. So long.”
Not my intent to defend anyone or anything. My intent was to point out that you would have a most difficult case. You should understand that maritime law prevails here which is vastly different.