Judge Dismisses SeaWorld “Duck Knockout” Lawsuit: Woman Hit by Wild Bird on Mako Coaster – Full Story & Latest Details
SeaWorld Duck Lawsuit: In one of the strangest theme park lawsuits in recent years, a Florida judge has dismissed a case against SeaWorld Orlando filed by a woman who claimed she was knocked unconscious after being hit in the face by a bird while riding the Mako roller coaster.
The lawsuit, often called the “duck knockout” case online, quickly went viral due to its unusual nature. However, the court ruled that SeaWorld cannot be held legally responsible for the unpredictable actions of wild animals.
Below is a full breakdown of what happened, what each side argued, and why the judge dismissed the case—at least for now.
Must Read: 🌲 Hoia Baciu Forest – The Forest That Swallowed a Village
What Happened on the Mako Roller Coaster?
The incident reportedly took place on March 24, 2025, when Hillary Martin was riding Mako, SeaWorld Orlando’s tallest and fastest roller coaster. The ride reaches nearly 200 feet high and speeds of up to 73 mph.
According to Martin’s complaint, a bird flew into the path of the coaster during the ride and struck her in the face. She claimed the impact caused her to briefly lose consciousness and later led to ongoing physical and mental injuries.
Martin did not seek immediate medical treatment at the park. SeaWorld later stated that she declined on-site medical transport and chose to continue her visit. She reportedly sought medical care the following day.
Must Read: Some Birds Can Sleep While Flying — Nature’s Most Surprising Survival Skill
SeaWorld duck lawsuit: Why She Sued SeaWorld
Martin officially filed her lawsuit on October 27, 2025, naming both SeaWorld Orlando and its parent company, United Parks & Resorts, as defendants. She sought more than $50,000 in damages and demanded a jury trial.
Her claims included:
- Failure to keep the park safe for guests
- Creating a “zone of danger” by placing a high-speed ride near water that attracts birds
- Poor ride design that could confuse or disorient flying animals
- Failure to warn riders about the possibility of bird strikes
Her legal team argued that SeaWorld should have anticipated the risk because birds are common in Florida and around water features.
SeaWorld’s Defense: “This Was Not a Duck”
SeaWorld filed a motion to dismiss the case on November 19, 2025, firmly rejecting the negligence claims.
Key points in SeaWorld’s defense:
- The bird involved was not a duck, but a snowy egret, a protected wild migratory bird common in Florida
- SeaWorld does not own, control, train, or introduce wild birds into the park
- Florida law does not require businesses to prevent harm caused by unpredictable wild animals
- The claim that the ride created a dangerous bird environment was speculative and unsupported
In a statement that drew attention online, SeaWorld’s attorneys said:
“This matter does not and has never involved a duck.”
SeaWorld also noted that no official incident was recorded in the park’s safety reports at the time.
Must Read: Octopuses Are the Closest Thing to Aliens on Earth
The Judge’s Decision: Why SeaWorld Duck Lawsuit Dismissed
On January 6, 2026, Orange County Circuit Judge Brian Sandor dismissed the lawsuit.
The ruling relied heavily on a long-standing Florida legal precedent from Palumbo v. State Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission (1986). That case established that property owners are generally not liable for injuries caused by wild animals, unless they:
- Owned the animal
- Controlled or harbored it
- Introduced it into the environment
Judge Sandor ruled that Martin failed to show SeaWorld had control over the bird or created the danger intentionally.
However, the dismissal was not final. The judge allowed Martin 20 days to amend and refile the complaint if she can provide new evidence showing SeaWorld had a direct role in creating the risk.
Why This Case Went Viral
The lawsuit exploded online due to its unusual details:
- Headlines full of bird-related puns like “fowl play”
- Social media memes showing ducks and egrets riding roller coasters
- Comparisons to the famous 1999 Fabio goose incident at Busch Gardens
Public opinion has been mixed. Some people argue theme parks should do more to protect riders, while others say wildlife incidents are unavoidable in Florida.
Similar Cases and Legal Impact
Legal experts say this ruling reinforces an important principle:
Theme parks are not automatically responsible for random wildlife encounters.
Similar cases involving wild animals at parks and public attractions have typically failed unless negligence or control can be clearly proven.
The decision may also influence how future lawsuits involving wildlife and amusement parks are handled, especially in states with abundant natural habitats like Florida.
What Happens Next?
For now, the case is dismissed. Hillary Martin may still refile if she can present stronger evidence within the allowed time.
SeaWorld has not commented further, stating only that guest safety remains a top priority.
Whether this case is truly over—or just on pause—remains to be seen.
FAQs
❓ What is the SeaWorld duck lawsuit about?
The SeaWorld duck lawsuit involves a Florida woman, Hillary Martin, who claimed she was knocked unconscious after being hit by a duck while riding the Mako roller coaster at SeaWorld Orlando in March 2025. She sued the park for negligence and demanded $50,000 in damages.
❓ What exactly did Hillary Martin claim happened?
Hillary Martin said that while riding the high-speed Mako roller coaster, a bird flew into her face, knocking her out and causing injuries. In her lawsuit, she initially described the bird as a duck and claimed the incident caused lasting physical harm.
❓ Was the bird actually a duck?
No. SeaWorld later confirmed that the bird was not a duck, but a wild snowy egret, a migratory bird commonly found in Florida. This distinction became a key point in the case.
❓ Did SeaWorld admit that a bird strike occurred?
Yes. SeaWorld acknowledged that Martin was struck by a bird during the ride. However, the park emphasized that the bird was wild and not owned, controlled, or placed there by SeaWorld staff.
❓ Did Hillary Martin receive medical help at the park?
According to SeaWorld, Martin refused medical attention after the incident because she wanted to continue enjoying the park and riding attractions. She reportedly sought medical care later.
❓ Why did the judge dismiss the SeaWorld duck lawsuit?
Orange County Judge Brian Sandor dismissed the lawsuit because Florida law does not hold property owners responsible for injuries caused by unpredictable wild animals they do not control. Since the bird was wild, SeaWorld could not be held legally responsible under existing law.
❓ What legal precedent did the judge rely on?
Judge Sandor cited a 1986 Florida case, Palumbo v. State Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, which ruled that landowners are not required to protect visitors from harm caused by wild animals unless the animals are owned, controlled, or intentionally placed there.
❓ Can Hillary Martin re-file the SeaWorld duck lawsuit?
Yes, but with strict conditions. The judge allowed Martin 20 days to re-file her lawsuit only if she can provide evidence that:
- SeaWorld owned or controlled the egret, or
- SeaWorld staff intentionally placed the egret in the park
Without such proof, the lawsuit cannot proceed.
❓ How much money was Hillary Martin seeking?
Martin demanded $50,000 in damages from SeaWorld for her alleged injuries.
❓ Was the incident listed in SeaWorld’s official reports?
No. Martin’s injury did not appear in SeaWorld’s mandatory quarterly incident filings, which the park is legally required to submit.
❓ What happened to the egret after the incident?
The condition and fate of the snowy egret are unknown. There have been no reports confirming whether the bird was injured or recovered.
❓ What does this ruling mean for SeaWorld and other theme parks?
The ruling reinforces that theme parks are generally not liable for injuries caused by wild animals, as long as the animals are not owned, controlled, or deliberately introduced by the park.
❓ Why did this case gain so much attention?
The lawsuit attracted widespread attention due to its unusual nature, wordplay-filled headlines involving “duck” jokes, and the bizarre idea of a bird knocking someone out on a roller coaster.
❓ Is the SeaWorld duck lawsuit officially over?
For now, yes. The case has been dismissed, but it could return if Hillary Martin files a new complaint with additional evidence within the allowed time frame.
