Z.E. v. Seaworld, LLC

On September 10, 2021, Z.E., a minor, by and through his mother and Guardian Ad Litem Rikki Marie Dobbs (hereinafter referred to collectively as, “Plaintiff”), represented by Ahren A. Tiller of BLC Law Center, APC, filed a personal injury lawsuit against Seaworld, LLC (hereinafter referred to as “SeaWorld” or “Defendant”), seeking compensatory relief, along with pre-judgment interest, for Defendant’s alleged negligence in designing, controlling and operating the Electric Eel Roller Coaster which created a dangerous condition for users thereof due to Defendant’s alleged failure to use known and utilized safety features to secure its customers when riding said Roller Coaster. This case was filed in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California with Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz and Judge Karen S. Crawford presiding. 

In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that, “On September 13, 2019, the minor Plaintiff entered the Theme Park with his mother. After being measured by the Defendant’s staff who were operating the rollercoaster ride named: “Electric Eel,” and being assured he was over 54 inches tall and thus a safe height to ride said ride, Plaintiff rode the “Electric Eel” (“Roller Coaster”), whereby he suffered a severe laceration to his forehead, head contusion, concussion, and emotional distress from the unsafe design of said Roller Coaster.”

The Plaintiff further alleged that, “The Electric Eel ride forcefully jolts the Defendant’s customers forwards and then backwards at high speeds, thus causing the customer’s heads and necks to jerk forwards when the ride abruptly switches direction.” Plaintiff then alleged that, “However, instead of providing the Defendant’s customers with a safety harness that tightly fits the riders, here SeaWorld (presumably to cause excitement and fear) leaves the harness loose, thus creating an unnecessarily unsafe condition, which allows the rider’s body to jerk their head and necks forward abruptly without protection from said jolts.” 

The Plaintiff the alleged that, “Here, on September 13, 2019, as a direct and proximate result of the subject rollercoaster’s aforementioned unsafe design, when the ride switched directions the Plaintiff’s head was jerked forward slamming his forehead into the sharp metal hook on the harness, thereby cutting his forehead, causing a severe contusion, and concussion, which caused Plaintiff to be forced to obtain stitches, suffer scarring, and emotional distress as a result.” 

The Plaintiff lists three claims for relief. The first claim alleged is for Negligence, the second claim alleged is for Premises Liability, and the third claim alleged is for Products Liability-Strict Liability. The Plaintiff alleged that Defendant negligently, carelessly and recklessly operated, inspected, repaired, maintained, modified, managed, controlled and supervised the Subject Premises, and permitted or created the dangerous condition on the Subject Premises so as to cause or allow dangerous and/or defective conditions thereon, and that at all times mentioned herein, the conditions of said Subject Premises were such that individuals upon the Subject Premises, including the Plaintiff, were exposed to danger and injury while lawfully attending Defendant’s Theme Park. 

In his prayer for relief, the Plaintiff requested the Court to enter judgment against Defendant as to all Cause of Actions; for an award of compensatory damages according to proof, along with prejudgment interest at 10% per annum pursuant to California Civil Code section (CA Civ. C. §) 329; and award such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.