Georgia Woman Sues Royal Caribbean Group After Slip and Fall on Wet Floor in Windjammer Buffet Onboard Oasis of the Seas
Kadian Scarlett-Moore, a resident and citizen of Georgia, has filed a maritime personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Group in the Southern District of Florida. The federal lawsuit, filed under Case No. 1:26-cv-24487-RKA, alleges that Scarlett-Moore suffered severe and permanent physical injuries after slipping on a hazardous transitory substance while walking through the Windjammer dining area aboard the Oasis of the Seas on July 1, 2025.
Cruise Passenger Injured in Oasis of the Seas Buffet Area Due to Slippery Floor and Inadequate Warning Signs
According to the legal complaint, the incident took place around 7:00 p.m. while Scarlett-Moore was traveling as a fare-paying passenger. While walking through the popular Windjammer buffet area on Deck 15 carrying plates of food, she suddenly encountered a slippery, liquid substance on the floor surface. The complaint notes that a yellow foldable wet floor caution sign had been placed in the general vicinity prior to her fall. Scarlett-Moore actively attempted to navigate safely around the visible warning sign, believing she was steering clear of the hazard, but the wet area extended much further across the walking surface than she could reasonably anticipate. The liquid blend was not adequately visible to dining passengers because it matched the color and appearance of the surrounding deck flooring, creating a hidden trap. Upon stepping onto the wet surface, she lost her footing and suffered a violent fall, striking her head and back against the hard deck floor.
Royal Caribbean Accused of Vicarious Liability and Failing to Remedy Hazardous Conditions Despite Crew Presence
The lawsuit asserts that Royal Caribbean Group is directly responsible for the actions of its staff and possessed both actual and constructive knowledge of the dangerous conditions prior to the accident. According to the filing, corporate crew members were actively mopping the floor within ten to fifteen feet of the exact location where Scarlett-Moore fell. These employees had a clear, direct line of sight to the wet area and were close enough to observe the serious hazard it posed to passengers moving through the buffet. Despite their immediate proximity, the shipboard staff failed to properly remedy the slippery surface, did not expand the warning zone, and failed to block off the extended wet perimeter before the plaintiff approached. Under federal maritime legal standards, the cruise line is accused of failing to inspect the heavy-traffic dining area at required intervals, violating its own internal safety protocols which dictate routine sweeping and floor monitoring to prevent passenger injuries.
Complaint Alleges Defective Floor Design, Low Coefficient of Friction, and Substandard Lighting in Dining Hall
In addition to operational negligence, the legal complaint focuses heavily on corporate design defects involving the physical flooring materials selected for the Oasis of the Seas class of cruise ships. The plaintiff alleges that Royal Caribbean participated directly in generating the design specifications or accepted the vessel with known engineering flaws that reduce floor traction when exposed to moisture. Legal counsel points out that the buffet flooring failed to meet established industry safety guidelines, specifically citing American National Standards Institute provisions A137.1 and B101.3. These guidelines recommend a coefficient of friction or slip resistance standard of at least .42, with the plaintiff maintaining that a proper wet-surface safety threshold should reach .60. Testing allegedly shows the buffet walkway fell significantly below both standards. Furthermore, the complaint claims the general lighting design in the Windjammer buffet hall was unreasonably dim, which actively prevented passengers from noticing the wet floor, and notes a complete lack of structural handrails or grab points that could have helped Scarlett-Moore mitigate her fall.
Plaintiff Seeks Compensation for Fractured Coccyx, Incompetent Medical Care, and Lost Vacation Value
Scarlett-Moore brings five distinct counts against Royal Caribbean Group, including negligent failure to remedy, negligent failure to warn, negligent design and installation, vicarious liability for employee design selection, and general vicarious liability for crew negligence. The impact of the fall resulted in severe bodily harm, including a diagnosed fractured coccyx that required her to spend the night in the shipboard medical infirmary. The cruise ship doctor advised her to disembark at a port of call in St. Kitts to undergo an immediate head CT scan due to her head trauma. However, the lawsuit notes that the local medical facilities in St. Kitts provided incompetent care, failing to properly evaluate the head injury during the emergency assessment. The lawsuit seeks extensive compensation for permanent and continuing physical pain, emotional distress, medical and hospitalization bills, past lost wages, diminished future earning capacity, and the total loss of enjoyment and financial value of her cruise vacation.
Contact a Cruise Ship Buffet Slip and Fall Attorney Today to Protect Your Rights After an Onboard Accident
Cruise passengers who suffer severe injuries due to slippery flooring, wet buffet decks, or poorly placed warning signs have a right to pursue accountability under federal maritime law. Cruise operators are legally required to maintain all public spaces, dining halls, and walkways in a reasonably safe condition for travelers. If you or a loved one experienced a severe injury while traveling at sea, reaching out to an experienced team of maritime personal injury lawyers can help you secure compensation for medical care and lost wages.
Contact us now to speak with a cruise ship slip and fall attorney.
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.
