California Family Files Federal Lawsuit Against Carnival Over Alleged Assault of Minor Passenger Aboard Carnival Panorama

A California mother has filed a federal lawsuit against Carnival Corporation, alleging that her sixteen-year-old daughter was sexually harassed and assaulted by a Carnival crewmember aboard the Carnival Panorama during a trans-Pacific voyage. The case, titled A.G., a minor, by and through her mother, Airica Spinks v. Carnival Corporation (Case No. 1:25-cv-24776-BB), was filed on October 16, 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.

The complaint asserts both admiralty jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1333 and diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1332, seeking damages exceeding $75,000. The plaintiffs are represented by Mark Hanson of Morgan & Morgan, West Palm Beach, Florida.

Background of the Incident

According to the complaint, the family boarded the Carnival Panorama in Singapore on October 12, 2024, for a 25-day voyage scheduled to conclude in Long Beach, California on November 5, 2024. The minor passenger, identified as A.G., was traveling with her mother, Airica Spinks, and other family members.

On the evening of October 19, 2024, the complaint alleges, A.G. reported issues with the in-cabin television and Wi-Fi service. Two uniformed Carnival employees were dispatched to investigate. During that initial visit, A.G. allegedly observed one employee—identified in the complaint as Employee #1 or “EE1”—staring inappropriately at her chest, making her uncomfortable enough to put on a jacket.

A short time later, EE1 allegedly returned uninvited to the stateroom claiming to deliver a remote control. Upon entry, he reportedly locked the deadbolt behind him, trapping the minor passenger inside. The complaint contends that EE1 cornered A.G. on the bed, made sexualized remarks, told her she was “beautiful” and “sexy,” and pressured her to exchange phone numbers. Fearing further harm, A.G. complied to avoid escalation.

The encounter ended when a friend knocked on the cabin door, startling the employee, who then fled.

Reporting and Cruise Line Response

The following morning, October 20, 2024, A.G. disclosed the incident to her mother, who immediately contacted ship security and Guest Services. Carnival’s onboard security reportedly reviewed surveillance footage showing the crewmember inside the cabin for an extended period and photographed the minor’s phone to capture the employee’s contact information.

The complaint alleges that although Carnival acknowledged the seriousness of the incident, its response was insufficient. The cruise line allegedly:

• Apologized and offered complimentary services, including a free excursion and onboard therapy;
• Failed to isolate or remove the employee from passenger areas;
• Did not communicate the employee’s status or any disciplinary action; and
• Did not implement additional safety measures for the remainder of the voyage.

The family continued the voyage until disembarkation on November 5, 2024. On that final day, Carnival security again requested a meeting to “file a formal complaint,” which plaintiffs allege highlights the delay and inadequacy of Carnival’s initial response.

Psychological and Emotional Impact

The complaint describes A.G. as experiencing symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), including hypervigilance, compulsive door-locking, avoidance of ship activities, and persistent anxiety. The experience allegedly disrupted her sleep, daily functioning, and enjoyment of the cruise, causing continued emotional distress.

Broader Allegations Against Carnival

Beyond the single incident, the lawsuit alleges that sexual harassment and battery aboard Carnival vessels were reasonably foreseeable, citing U.S. Department of Transportation statistics showing 17 sexual assaults or batteries reported on Carnival ships between October and December 2024, including two involving crewmembers.

The complaint accuses Carnival of:

• Marketing itself as a “family-friendly cruise line” without implementing sufficient safeguards for minors;
• Failing to properly screen, train, or supervise employees who access guest cabins;
• Delegating background checks to third-party “hiring partners” in developing countries where verification may be unreliable; and
• Failing to monitor surveillance systems or enforce policies designed to prevent such encounters.

The plaintiffs assert that Carnival’s recruitment and supervision practices create a foreseeable risk of misconduct by employees with direct passenger access.

Legal Theories and Causes of Action

Count I – Negligent Failure to Warn
Carnival allegedly breached its duty to warn passengers of known risks of crew-on-passenger assaults, lack of adequate background screening, and deficient onboard security. The complaint claims that if appropriate warnings or precautions had been provided, the minor would not have been left alone in the stateroom.

Count II – Negligent Security
Carnival allegedly failed to provide reasonable security measures, including adequate monitoring of crew conduct, supervision of cabin maintenance visits, and prompt response to passenger reports of misconduct. The suit also accuses Carnival of failing to restrict the assailant’s access or reassure the family of their safety.

Count III – Vicarious Liability
The complaint contends Carnival is legally responsible for its employee’s conduct, asserting that EE1’s actions occurred within the course and scope of his employment while performing ship-related duties. It further alleges that Carnival’s policies prohibiting crewmembers from entering a minor’s cabin alone were violated.

Claimed Damages

The plaintiff seeks damages for:

• Physical and emotional pain and suffering;
• Mental anguish and post-traumatic stress symptoms;
• Disfigurement, disability, and loss of enjoyment of life;
• Medical expenses for treatment and counseling;
• Lost earnings and earning capacity; and
• Loss of vacation value and cruise expenses.

The complaint alleges these injuries are permanent or continuing in nature.

Maritime Legal Context

Under general maritime law, cruise operators owe passengers a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances. Courts have repeatedly held that this duty extends to protecting passengers from foreseeable criminal acts by crewmembers or others onboard.

In cases involving minors or vulnerable passengers, this duty is heightened by the carrier’s ability to control crew conduct, surveillance systems, and cabin access. Cruise lines that market to families or children—as Carnival prominently does—may face additional scrutiny regarding the adequacy of supervision, hiring, and training practices.

Carnival and other major carriers are required by the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2010 to report onboard sexual assaults to the FBI and the Department of Transportation, and these reports are publicly available. The data cited in this complaint derives from those federal reporting obligations.

This case underscores ongoing scrutiny of crew-on-passenger assault allegations and the security responsibilities of cruise lines under maritime law. As federal courts continue to define the boundaries of reasonable care aboard passenger vessels, this and similar filings in the Southern District of Florida serve as key indicators of how maritime negligence and vicarious liability theories evolve in passenger-safety litigation.

Cruise Line Lawsuit Weekly will continue tracking developments in this and other recent filings involving passenger safety aboard major cruise lines, including motions, discovery rulings, and trial settings as the case progresses.