Skip to main content

Maritime Law--3d DCA Allows Class Action by Doctors Against Celebrity Cruises


In Celebrity Cruises, Inc. v. Rankin, et al, No. 3D14-3137 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 16, 2015), Celebrity failed to stave off a class certification case filed by a group of cruise ship doctors suing the company for breach of contract. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court decision certifying a class of about 41 doctors who claim they are owed commissions from medication sales.
 
 

The Miami-based cruise line owned by Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. argued each doctor's understanding of the contract would overwhelm issues common to the class. The court disagreed, finding that common issues dominated individual issues because the class members were all "beneficiaries of [an] identical written contractual provision."

The order included an excerpt from Celebrity management's internal emails that stated, "According to the signed contracts, physicians' commission should be on total medical revenue (procedure and medication sales) as opposed to commission on procedure only." The doctors claim they are paid only for medical services and revenue from medication was improperly omitted from their pay calculations.

The class includes ship doctors who worked under Celebrity contracts from September 2004 to December 2009.
 
This is a big win for the doctors, as the appellate court clearly found that because all the doctors were subject to the same contract, this meant that Celebrity intended to treat them in a similar or common way. The cruise lines are notorious for having all personnel that serve aboard sign contracts of employment and in this instance, having the same category of personnel signing the same contract has seemingly worked against them in this instance.
 
if you are interested in receiving a copy of the decision, you may reach me via this blog or at lawofficesofmov@gmail.com.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ReThink + ReUse Center "It's How We Roll" Fun Raiser -- Bowling Night -- October 16, 2014

As many of my readers may be aware, I am the Chair of the ReThink + ReUse Center, a non-for-profit educational and environmental Center in Miami educating children into rethinking reuseable materials for learning through play. The ReThink and ReUse Center’s Quality Play is Learning Program provides a series of educational and participatory workshops based on the philosophies of Reggio Emilia and Harvard's Project Zero Visible Thinking. The Children’s Trust is the major funder of this program, but the Center is required to continually fundraise for the balance its annual budget.   The Center is having a fun event you are invited to--the ReThink + Reuse Center’s “It’s How We Roll” bowling event on October 16, 2014 at Splitsville Luxury Lanes from 18:00 to 21:30 hours. My firm, Comcast and Waste Management are major sponsors for this event, but we could use a few more sponsors. If you are interested in sponsoring the event, please let me know by reaching me at mov@chalos

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector.       The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl

Maritime Law--Lozman Case Revisited in Miami?

In Hoefling v. City of Miami , Case no.: 14-12482 (11th Cir. Jan. 25, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit revived almost all of Hoefling's claims. You ask, "Who is Hoefling?" Hoefling  lived on his sailboat Metis O moored off Dinner Key for nearly a decade—until the day he came home and it was gone. About three months earlier, an officer from the Miami Police Department's Marine Patrol Detail tagged Hoefling's vessel for lacking a sanitary device and a working anchor light. He had a deal to use the facilities at the nearby marina but quickly went out and reportedly bought what he needed to comply. Three months later while he was on a business trip, the City of Miami seized and destroyed his boat and all his belongings. As a result, he was homeless. He sued under § 1983, maritime law, and state law. He stated a claim under the Fourth Amendment for seizure and destruction without notice or cause and a “taking.”    At the U.S. Distric