Florida Man Files Lawsuit Against Carnival After Striking Head on Low Doorway During Disembarkation
Florida resident Thomas Clary has filed a federal maritime lawsuit against Carnival Corporation in the Southern District of Florida, alleging that a dangerously low overhead doorway aboard the Carnival Pride caused him to strike his head during disembarkation, resulting in serious injuries. The complaint, filed April 29, 2025, is styled Thomas Clary v. Carnival Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-21945-RAR.
Passenger Alleges Poorly Maintained Disembarkation Area Caused Head and Spinal Injuries
According to the complaint, Clary was disembarking the Carnival Pride on November 30, 2023, when he struck his head on an overhead steel lintel in the transition area between the ship and the gangway. The suit alleges that the vertical clearance in the doorway was inadequate for passengers of average height and that the condition was not visible or marked in a way that would warn disembarking passengers.
Clary suffered serious injuries, including head trauma and spinal injuries that required surgical repair. He also claims ongoing pain, mental anguish, disfigurement, and future medical expenses. The complaint asserts that Carnival knew or should have known about the hazard and failed to maintain the area safely or provide effective warning.
Complaint Cites Failed Prior Safety Measures and Ongoing Risk
The lawsuit states that Carnival attempted to pad the steel doorway lintel at some point before the incident, but that the padding was inadequate to prevent injury. The complaint further alleges that this ineffective fix, coupled with the absence of signage or crew guidance at the time, demonstrates Carnival’s knowledge of the danger and failure to take reasonable corrective action.
Clary brings four counts against the cruise line:
- Negligent maintenance of the disembarkation area
- Negligent failure to warn about the low clearance hazard
- Failure of a common carrier to maintain safe areas of egress
- Failure of a common carrier to warn of known dangers
Counts III and IV rely on the heightened duty of care owed by common carriers under maritime law, arguing that Carnival had a nondelegable obligation to ensure a safe disembarkation process and to warn passengers of any hidden or foreseeable dangers.
Legal Significance and Broader Industry Implications
This case underscores the legal responsibilities cruise lines face when passengers disembark—a moment often overlooked but legally significant. Under general maritime law, cruise operators must ensure safe ingress and egress from the ship, and courts have routinely held them liable for structural hazards in walkways, gangways, and transitional thresholds.
Clary’s claims also raise questions about the adequacy of retrofitted safety measures. If padding was installed but failed to prevent injury, Carnival may face arguments that it not only had notice of the risk, but also acknowledged it through prior corrective attempts. Under Eleventh Circuit precedent, such evidence can satisfy a plaintiff’s burden of proving actual or constructive notice.
The case may also invite scrutiny of similar structural hazards on other vessels and whether design or engineering reviews are needed to protect passengers from foreseeable head injuries during routine operations.
Injured while disembarking from a cruise ship? Contact a Cruise Ship Lawyer Today.
