Hayman

Hayman v. Sitmar Cruises, Inc.

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 4th 1499·18 Cal. Rptr. 2d 412·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 403·93 Daily Journal DAR 4833
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 15, 1993B058688California2,293 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hoffman, J.

Introduction

Plaintiff and appellant Clarice Hayman (appellant) appeals from a judgment entered against her and in favor of defendants and respondents Sitmar Cruises, Inc. (Sitmar) and Princess Cruises, Inc. (Princess) (Sitmar and Princess are referred to collectively as respondents) after the grant of respondents’ motion for summary judgment on the ground appellant’s action was barred for her failure to effect service within one year. We reverse the judgment.

Statement of Facts and Procedural History

On July 19, 1988, appellant, a passenger aboard the cruise ship Fairwind, sustained injuries to her right arm and hand when the elevator in which she was riding stopped abruptly. She immediately reported the accident to shipboard personnel who took her statement and conducted an investigation.

On October 3, 1988, appellant’s attorney wrote to Sitmar requesting information concerning Sitmar’s liability insurance. Discussions between Sitmar and appellant’s attorney followed, and several months later, on January 19, 1989, Sitmar’s claims representative provided appellant with a copy of the accident report taken shipboard and requested that appellant’s attorney provide him…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.