Sexual and other physical assaults are crimes of violence and domination. Victims often suffer severe and permanent psychological consequences.

Mr. Eriksen has three adult daughters of his own; and a wife of over forty years. He cares. He understands from his legal cases how incredibly difficult it is for sexual assault victims to come forward in the first place; and the need for sensitivity and discretion in handling these matters. The victims do not have to be publicly named in any ensuing lawsuit. As an example, see Doe v. Zenith.

There have been many instances over the years where female and/or minor passengers of vessels have been sexually and/or physically assaulted by members of the crew. In some cases, security and/or discipline on board the vessels was lax or non-existent, and a pattern of disregard of prior complaints and dangerous conditions may have existed.

In 1994, Mr. Eriksen successfully handled the landmark case and appeal of Nadeau v. Costley, which held that a cruise passenger need not prove separate negligence by the cruise operator to recover damages for intentional misconduct against a passenger by a crew member, even outside the scope of employment. This is called “strict liability.”

Later, in 2004, Mr. Eriksen participated in the appeal of Doe v. Zenith, wherein the Eleventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals adopted the Nadeau v. Costley rule for federal lawsuits.

As a result of handling these types of lawsuits, Michael D. Eriksen has accumulated extensive information regarding prior complaints of sexual assaults on board cruise ships, which assists in the representation of new clients.

Familiarity with this complicated and sensitive area of the law is essential to effectively represent new clients who are victims of such personal attacks during cruises.

Mr. Eriksen also has broad experience in identifying and working with experts in sexual assault trauma, forensics, and security. Familiarity with this complicated and sensitive area of the law and evidence assists us in effectively representing clients who are victims of such personal attacks.

Some sexual assaults during cruises have occurred because passengers were “under the influence” (of alcohol served aboard ship) and thereby became more susceptible to attack and/or unable to defend themselves.

In 2004, Mr. Eriksen handled another landmark case, Hall v. RCCL, in which a Florida state court of appeal heightened a vessel operator’s responsibility to passengers in the service of alcoholic beverages.

Mr. Eriksen personally handles all cases accepted by Eriksen Law Firm. He personally deals with his clients, who are not relegated to paralegals or legal assistants. All preliminary client consultations with Mr. Eriksen are absolutely free; and Mr. Eriksen charges a “contingent fee,” which means he gets paid and reimbursed for expenses only if he recovers money for his client.

A rational way to evaluate and select a plaintiffs attorney is to identify, contact, and ask lawyers who have opposed them (rather than relying on an advertisement or website of an unfamiliar plaintiffs lawyer). Defense law firms which have opposed Mr. Eriksen in the recent past, and are familiar with him, include Horr, Skipp & Perez; Mase, Seitz, & Briggs; and Fertig & Gramling.