July 6, 2026·1:24-cv-23143-BB·Per Curiam·By Aisha Johnson
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment in a maritime negligence case involving a cruise ship passenger. The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove the cruise line had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition that caused his injuries.
Maurice Cunningham, a passenger on a Carnival cruise ship, alleged he ingested glass in a meal and suffered significant injuries. He sued Carnival for negligence, but the district court granted summary judgment for Carnival because Cunningham failed to conduct timely discovery and could not prove the cruise line had notice of the glass in the food.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied general maritime negligence principles, requiring proof that the defendant breached a duty of care. The court found that establishing a duty required showing the carrier had actual or constructive notice of the risk. Cunningham conceded there was no evidence of such notice. The court also rejected the argument that res ipsa loquitur could establish the duty, noting that the doctrine only permits inferring a breach of duty, not the existence of the duty itself.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that maritime negligence plaintiffs must actively pursue discovery to prove a carrier’s notice of hazards, as res ipsa loquitur cannot substitute for proving the foundational duty of care.
