Woman Who Lost 9 Family Members in Drowning Sues Over Duck Boat Design
A woman whose nine family members died when a duck boat sank in Missouri on July 19 is alleging in a new lawsuit that the operators knew that the design of canopies on the vehicles could create a “death trap” for passengers.
September 04, 2018 at 06:57 PM
4 minute read
A woman whose nine family members died when a duck boat sank in Missouri on July 19 is alleging in a new lawsuit that the operators knew that the design of canopies on the vehicles could create a “death trap” for passengers.
The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday in federal court in Missouri, joins at least six others brought by survivors and family members of the victims of the sinking, in which 17 of the 31 people on board drowned. The Missouri Attorney General's Office also brought a suit last week. Like many of the lawsuits, the case alleged negligence and strict products liability claims, asserting that Ripley Entertainment Inc. and previous tour operators were aware since 1999 that the design of the duck boats were unsafe.
Andrew Duffy, of Philadelphia's Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky, filed Tuesday's suit for Tia Coleman on behalf of her husband, two sons and daughter, who were among the nine members of her family who died.
“The focus of the case is making sure this never happens to another human being,” Duffy said. “These duck boats have now killed over 40 people since 1999.”
A spokeswoman for Ripley, which is based in Orlando, referred requests for comment to the website bransonducks.com, which offered condolences to “all that have been affected.” The website stated: “The business has not operated since the incident so we can take time to focus on our guests, employees and families who were affected by the accident. We remain committed to supporting our guests, families and employees who were affected. To assist families in their time of need, we continue to offer to pay for all related medical bills, funeral expenses and grief counseling.”
In addition to lawsuits, the duck boat sinking has prompted a criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Missouri. On Aug. 29, federal prosecutors in that office filed motions to intervene in at least three of the lawsuits in order to stay discovery pending its criminal investigation, insisting that it's “virtually inevitable that any discovery sought in this case will interfere with the government's investigation.”
The suits claim a National Transportation Safety Board report recommended that duck boats remove their canopies and add reserve buoyancy to make them safer. That report followed the 1999 sinking of a duck boat in Hot Springs, Arkansas, that killed 13 people.
Duffy said there's “no credible claim” that a duck boat operator wasn't aware about the deficiencies in the canopies. “Unfortunately, there are still canopies across the country,” he said. “Some operators claim to have changed that. We have not seen what yet that we deemed acceptable.”
Also, according to his latest suit, Ripley's made no changes to the duck boats when it acquired the company in 2017, even after an inspector recommended safety improvements.
The latest case, along with prior lawsuits, also brought claims under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, alleging Ripley made false assurances of safety to its customers.
At least one other suit named the captain and driver of the boat, one of whom was among the 17 victims. Despite an impending thunderstorm, the duck boat went out into the water, instead of canceling the tour, and the captain told passengers they did not need to wear life jackets.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
‘A Force of Nature’: Littler Mendelson Shareholder Michael Lotito Dies At 76
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250