FWIS3

I'm not sure how judge's decide when a case is frivolous and should be thrown out without being heard, but I'd sure vote for this one!

Judges decide based on the evidence presented in a preliminary hearing. If there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the plaintiff has a reasonable chance to succeed with a case, the suit proceeds. Judges do not - or should not - dismiss a case just because they think it's frivolous. They have to weigh the preliminary evidence against what the law requires to establish liability.

That said, this might not be frivolous. While I don't think there is such a thing as 'over-serving' alcohol on a cruise ship (no one is drinking & driving, for instance), there may well be enough legal precedent to say they have a responsibility to at least notice when people fall overboard. They are, after all, in the business of getting people drunk. Drunk people fall down a lot.

Serving people drinks but not watching out for them when the life lines are clearly inadequate is pretty irresponsible but by the same token people want the ability to do anything reckless that they want and not have to be responsible for the results of their actions.

*edited for typo*

this reminds me of buglers who get comp even for doing something illegal

Loresinger wrote:this reminds me of buglers who get comp even for doing something illegal

It's not illegal to bugler somebody in some places. Just saying.

Tangentially related: the one case my dad almost got seated on for a jury was a civil suit where someone was suing a cruise line because the floor was slippery and they fell. My dad being my dad, once they heard he was a PhD in engineering they used a strike against him pretty quickly.