Legal Opinion

Natoel v. Royal Caribbean Cruise, Ltd.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 7, 1995No. Nos. 93-2163, 93-2587PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We affirm the trial court’s entry of a directed verdict in favor of the defendants on the issue of punitive damages and attorney’s fees in connection with the seaman’s claim for maintenance and cure. After reviewing the record below in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, Ligman v. Tardiff, 466 So.2d 1125, 1126 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 478 So.2d 54 (Fla.1985), we find that the defendants were entitled to a directed verdict as a matter of law where the seaman did not present evidence that the defendants had wilfully or arbitrarily failed to provide him with maintenance and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ford v. RobinsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
  2. Ligman v. TardiffDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  3. INTERN. SHIPS SERVICES v. CanalesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hack v. Estate of HellingDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
  2. Leone v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  3. Superior Garlic Intern. v. E & a CORP.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API