Oregon Passenger Sues Oceania Cruises After Severe Crush Injury on Tender Boarding Platform in Hawaii
Virginia Lynn Turner, a resident of Oregon, has filed a maritime personal injury lawsuit against Oceania Cruises Ltd in the Southern District of Florida. The lawsuit, filed under Case No. 1:26-cv-26208-KMW, alleges that Turner suffered severe and permanent injuries after her foot slipped on a wet tender boarding platform, causing her lower leg to become caught and crushed between a moving tender boat and the cruise ship Oceania Regatta on October 3, 2025.
Cruise Passenger Injured Transferring from Tender Boat to Oceania Regatta Due to Wet Platform and Inadequate Crew Assistance
According to the complaint, the incident occurred while the Oceania Regatta was anchored offshore in Kona, Hawaii, requiring passengers to utilize small tender craft to travel between the ship and shore. Turner, a 73-year-old passenger returning to the cruise ship after visiting the Kona waterfront, was attempting to disembark from the tender vessel onto the cruise ship tender boarding platform. While stepping forward, Turner encountered a platform surface that was slick and wet from accumulated ocean water. Although crew members were present to oversee disembarkation, the lawsuit asserts that they merely held her by her hands rather than providing proper physical stabilization at her torso or shoulders. As her right foot slipped on the wet deck, the tender boat shifted with the ocean swell, causing her left lower leg to become trapped and crushed between the shifting tender craft and the ship boarding platform. The complaint also highlights that the tender crew appeared to rush passengers off the vessel rather than ensuring a controlled and stable transfer.
Oceania Accused of Notice, Defective Tendering Procedures, and Failing to Warn of Moving Vessel Hazards
The legal filing claims that Oceania had actual and constructive knowledge of the dangerous conditions inherent in offshore tender operations. Transferring passengers between two independently moving vessels on open water presents well-documented risks of crushing, slipping, and falls. To support the claim of notice, the complaint points to prior tender-related passenger injuries aboard company and affiliated vessels, including an incident where a passenger aboard the Oceania Regatta was violently thrown inside a tender vessel off the coast of Alaska, as well as earlier litigation in the Southern District of Florida involving passengers crushed during tender boarding procedures. Furthermore, the complaint cites established maritime seamanship guidelines, including Chapman Piloting and Seamanship, as well as International Maritime Organization standards under the Safety of Life at Sea convention. Despite these recognized safety requirements and internal protocols governing waterborne embarkation, the lawsuit alleges that Oceania failed to clean or dry the platform, failed to properly moor and stabilize the tender boat, and failed to issue verbal cautions or post warning signs regarding wet surfaces and vessel motion.
Lawsuit Alleges Negligent Tender Platform Design, Defective Slip Resistance, and Inadequate Crew Safety Training
Beyond operational missteps during the transfer, Turner alleges that Oceania is directly liable for the negligent design, construction, and material selection of the tender boarding area. The complaint argues that the cruise line approved and installed decking materials on the platform that lacked adequate coefficient of friction and slip resistance when exposed to sea spray and water. Turner contends that the cruise line failed to incorporate necessary safeguards or design configurations that would prevent passenger limbs from becoming entrapped between shifting hulls. Additionally, the lawsuit brings claims for negligent training, asserting that Oceania failed to properly instruct its shipboard personnel on how to stabilize passengers during ocean transfers, how to manage movement between the vessel and platform, and how to safely inspect and maintain embarkation surfaces.
Passenger Seeks Damages for Severe Leg Crush Injuries, Cellulitis Infection, and Permanent Disability
The seven-count complaint includes causes of action for negligent failure to maintain under direct and vicarious liability theories, negligent failure to warn under direct and vicarious liability, negligent crew training, negligent design and selection of materials, and breach of the non-delegable duty to provide safe passage. Turner sustained a severe crush injury, deep open wounds, and a significant laceration to her left lower leg. The complaint states that while receiving daily care in the ship infirmary, she developed a severe bacterial infection and cellulitis, necessitating emergency hospital treatment, advanced antibiotic therapy, and extensive surgical debridement at an Oregon wound care facility following the cruise. Turner seeks compensatory damages for past and future medical care, physical disability, permanent impairment, scarring and disfigurement, mental anguish, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life.
Contact a Cruise Ship Tender Boat Accident Lawyer Today if You Were Hurt Boarding a Vessel in Port
Passengers who suffer injuries during tender boat transfers or while crossing cruise ship boarding platforms may have legal recourse under general maritime law. Cruise operators have a strict duty to provide safe ingress and egress, which includes implementing proper crowd control, stabilizing transfer vessels, drying slippery decks, and properly training crew members to support guests. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to an improperly managed tender transfer, contact an experienced maritime attorney to evaluate your claim and protect your rights.
Contact us now to speak with a maritime 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.
