- Contact Us for a Free Consultation 305-668-6410
Texas Passenger Sues Norwegian Cruise Line After Slip-and-Fall on Deck 18 of Norwegian Prima
A Texas woman has filed a negligence lawsuit against NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., alleging she suffered a serious spinal injury after slipping on a wet deck aboard the Norwegian Prima. The case, Judith Pursifull v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. (Case No. 1:25-cv-21326-JB), highlights persistent concerns about cruise ship deck maintenance, safety standards, and the cruise line’s failure to protect elderly passengers from foreseeable slip hazards.
Background of the Case against NCL
On April 8, 2024, 69-year-old Judith Pursifull was a fare-paying passenger aboard NCL’s Norwegian Prima when she slipped on a puddle of water shortly after walking onto Deck 18—a highly trafficked area adjacent to a public outdoor shower. According to the complaint, the puddle was not visible, and there were no signs or barriers warning passengers of the wet floor. NCL’s crew member reportedly arrived on the scene after the fall, but Pursifull had already suffered a burst vertebra that required emergency medical disembarkation, surgery, and hospitalization.
The complaint alleges that:
- The public shower near the area had been running on full blast for more than 30 minutes prior to the incident.
- The flooring was unreasonably slippery and lacked adequate drainage or anti-slip treatment.
- NCL crew members were nearby and failed to inspect, warn, or take preventive action.
- The cruise line was aware of prior similar incidents on its vessels but failed to improve safety measures.
Allegations Against NCL
Failure to Maintain Safe Walking Surfaces
The lawsuit claims NCL knew or should have known that the flooring near Deck 18’s shower area was prone to becoming dangerously slippery when wet. Despite this knowledge, the cruise line:
- Failed to use non-slip flooring materials.
- Failed to inspect or dry the area regularly.
- Did not close off or restrict access to the wet area.
Failure to Warn Passengers About the Hazard
There were no warning signs, cones, or crew members cautioning guests about the hazard. The wet surface was not visually apparent, especially to an elderly passenger like Pursifull, who had no way of knowing about the ongoing shower or pooling water.
Negligent Design and Oversight
The complaint accuses NCL of negligently approving the design of the deck area and shower placement. Specifically:
- Poor selection of flooring material with a low coefficient of friction.
- Failure to enforce safety protocols for monitoring wet areas.
- Lack of safeguards for high-risk passengers such as seniors with mobility issues.
Prior Slip-and-Fall Incidents on Norwegian Cruise Line Ships
The lawsuit references previous similar accidents aboard NCL vessels, asserting that the cruise line had notice of the recurring hazard:
- A.L. – Slipped on the pool deck of the Norwegian Getaway on September 13, 2022, due to excessive water accumulation.
- L.F. – Slipped on Deck 11 near the South Beach pool aboard the Norwegian Pride of America on July 23, 2022.
According to the plaintiff, NCL’s internal safety reports and video surveillance should have alerted the company to the danger on Deck 18 aboard the Prima. The cruise line allegedly settled prior similar claims with confidentiality agreements to avoid public scrutiny.
Legal Implications for Cruise Passenger Safety
This case raises significant legal questions about NCL’s responsibility to ensure a safe onboard environment:
- Should cruise lines be held liable for hazardous shower runoff and poor deck drainage?
- Are they obligated to post visible warning signs in areas likely to become slippery?
- Does a history of similar incidents create a presumption of notice under maritime law?
- What duty do cruise lines owe to elderly or mobility-impaired passengers in high-traffic areas?
The lawsuit relies heavily on principles of general maritime law, which holds cruise lines to a heightened duty of care for fare-paying passengers.
What’s Next?
The case will likely center on:
- Whether NCL had actual or constructive notice of the wet floor.
- If crew negligence or policy failures contributed to the accident.
- Whether the design and layout of Deck 18 failed to meet reasonable safety standards.
- NCL’s use of video monitoring and failure to act on known hazards.
- NCL may argue comparative fault or claim that the hazard was “open and obvious,” though such defenses often fail where plaintiffs are unaware of concealed dangers.
If you or someone you love has been injured in a similar incident aboard a cruise ship, consult with a maritime attorney to explore your legal rights. Cruise lines have a duty to maintain safe conditions and may be held accountable under federal maritime law.