RCCL CHANCES OF SETTLING
I addressed this in one of the previous threads so I'm not going to go too in depth into this, but the chances of RCCL settling out of court for this is close to, if not actually 0. Why? Because of precedent.
The burden of proof, in this case, that the plaintiffs have to meet is was RC negligent in that they didn't know/predict that SA would put the child in the window and drop her from the 11th deck, and take steps that would have prevented him from doing it. The answer is that no, the Wiegands will never be able to prove that.
For one thing, the claim in the suit that the ship is in violation of regulations is bunk. They are trying to hold the cruise ship to building/hotel standards, not seagoing vessel standards. While they say that cruise ships are basically "floating hotels" the safety codes and regulations between the two are very different for very obvious reasons, they are in no way the same. All that RC has to do is to provide coast guard and other agency inspection reports showing that those windows are in full compliance with current applicable regulations and that argument is tossed.
For another, there has never been a child under the age of about 13-15 who has gone overboard/out of a window going back some 30 years of records. An online database going back to 1995 and listing all incidents of passengers/staff going overboard on commercial passenger vessels (cruise ships and ferrys) Chloe is the ONLY small child. The only other child listed is a 7-year-old involved in a suicide in which the mother took him and jumped with him. There has never been one previous incident of a child falling out of a window on a cruise ship, because most people have enough common sense to keep them away from them. No one else has ever needed to be warned to not put a child into the window on a cruise ship, so why would they have ever thought SA would have needed to be protected from himself? The standards they are claiming were set because children had fallen out of hotel/building windows, but since that hasn't happened on a cruise ship there isn't any reason to say that RC should be following those ones instead of the ones already in place.
Cruise Passengers Overboard
And of course, RC already has clear safety instructions that passengers are issued prior to even showing up at the docks that SA ignored, stating that it's dangerous to sit/stand/climb on the railings. He was provided with those instructions prior to boarding and ignored them, putting her on the other side of said railing. By violating that set rule he takes on 100% of the blame.
As far as I can see, my opinion, there is absolutely NO CASE against the cruise line and absolutely no reason they or their insurer would settle in this instance. This case will probably be dismissed because they are suing on inapplicable standards or if it even goes to trial will be decided in RC favor, just as countless other lawsuits blaming them for people going overboard have been.
