Carnival Wins, Rest of Us Lose

The Supremes refused to hear mensch-in-training David H. Pollack's petition from a February Florida Supreme Court ruling that concluded that cruise lines are not liable for the malpractice of on-board physicians:

'It's a blow to cruise line passengers,'' said David H. Pollock, a Miami attorney who represents the family. ``I think for people who are ill or may become ill, it's a reason to think twice about taking a cruise.''

Here's the background:

The trial court dismissed Carlisle's case against Carnival, but the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami reinstated it in 2003, finding that the doctor was the ship's agent, and therefore the line could be held liable for his actions.

However, that decision -- which was based on a single, old case in northern California -- was at odds with most federal maritime decisions, which say that cruise lines aren't responsible for their doctors' actions.

The Florida Supreme Court, saying that federal maritime cases must be treated uniformly, threw out the case against Carnival in February, even though it agreed that the passenger's argument about the cruise line's indirect responsibility made sense.

Like Bork and Bill Frist, it's easy to be a tort reformer until you or someone you love gets injured by corporate malfeasance or neglect. That's when you get surprised how difficult and expensive it is to hold corporate defendants responsible for their misconduct.