Shirley Mauldin, a Florida resident, has filed a maritime personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. in the Southern District of Florida. Filed under Case No. 1:25-cv-23606-JEM, the lawsuit alleges that Mauldin suffered severe facial injuries after tripping on an unattended vacuum cord that obstructed the entrance to the My Fair Lady Dining Room aboard the Enchantment of the Seas.
The incident occurred on September 11, 2024, just outside the Deck 5 entrance to the My Fair Lady Dining Room. According to the complaint, a Royal Caribbean cleaner left a plugged-in vacuum with its power cord stretched across the main walkway, blocking access to the dining room during peak dinner service. The cleaner reportedly walked away, leaving the area unsupervised.
Mauldin, who had dinner reservations at the time, attempted to step over the cord but caught her foot and fell forward, striking her face on a free-standing hand sanitizer station. She suffered a severe laceration to her forehead, a swollen eye, and chest bruising. The injury required stitches and caused permanent damage.
The lawsuit alleges that Royal Caribbean breached its duty to maintain safe, hazard-free walkways for passengers by allowing a tripping hazard to remain in a high-traffic area without supervision or warning. The complaint emphasizes that the entrance to the dining room is part of a designated escape route under international safety regulations, and that cruise line policy prohibits blocking such pathways with cleaning equipment.
Mauldin contends that Royal Caribbean failed to enforce its own safety procedures and did not properly train cleaning crew to avoid leaving vacuum cords across common walkways. The complaint alleges the cruise line’s negligence includes both direct failure to maintain a safe environment and failure to supervise and train its cleaning staff appropriately.
The lawsuit identifies at least five prior slip-and-fall lawsuits involving passengers tripping over vacuum or electrical cords left across walkways on various Royal Caribbean ships, including the Harmony of the Seas, Symphony of the Seas, Jewel of the Seas, and Independence of the Seas. These previous cases are cited as evidence that Royal Caribbean knew or should have known about the dangers posed by leaving cords obstructing passenger routes.
Despite this pattern of similar incidents, Mauldin’s complaint asserts that Royal Caribbean failed to implement or enforce adequate preventive measures across its fleet, including the Enchantment of the Seas.
Mauldin alleges that the vacuum cord hazard was not open or obvious and that Royal Caribbean failed to post warning signs, use caution tape, or verbally alert her to the obstruction. She further claims that the cruise line violated safety standards established by the International Maritime Organization’s SOLAS treaty and other industry codes requiring escape routes and public walkways to remain clear at all times.
In addition to direct negligence and failure to warn, Mauldin’s complaint includes counts for vicarious liability, citing the responsibility of the ship’s supervisors and assistant housekeeping managers. She also asserts negligent training of the cleaning crew responsible for the hazardous setup.
Mauldin is seeking damages exceeding $75,000 for economic and non-economic losses, including past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, emotional distress, scarring, and loss of enjoyment of life. The complaint alleges that her injuries are permanent and continuing in nature.
A jury trial has been demanded.
Cruise passengers injured due to tripping hazards—such as vacuum cords, electrical cables, or other cleaning equipment—may be entitled to compensation under maritime law. Cruise lines have a legal obligation to maintain walkways in a safe condition, train their staff properly, and warn passengers of known dangers. If you or someone you love was injured due to a similar hazard aboard a cruise ship, contact our team today.
Contact us now to speak with a cruise ship trip and fall injury lawyer.
Disclaimer: Our firm does not represent the plaintiff in this case and is not involved in the litigation. The information provided is a summary of allegations based on publicly available court filings. We make no representations about the truth of these allegations, are not commenting on the merits of the case, and are not predicting any outcome.