Kara Maughon, et al v. Carnival Corporation

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MAY 30, 2013
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 09-15890
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 09-21453-CV-ASG
KARA MAUGHON,
on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated,
LEVI BLASDEL,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
CARNIVAL CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(May 30, 2013)
Before HULL, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

-- 1 of 2 --

Since the filing of this appeal in 2009, the Supreme Court and our Court
have touched on the precise issues raised in this appeal. Under our prior precedent
rule, “we are bound to follow a prior binding precedent ‘unless and until it is
overruled by this court en banc or by the Supreme Court.’” United States v.
Vega-Castillo, 540 F.3d 1235, 1236 (11th Cir. 2008) (quoting United States v.
Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 (11th Cir. 2003)); see also id. (“Even if the reasoning
of an intervening high court decision is at odds with a prior appellate court
decision, that does not provide the appellate court with a basis for departing from
its prior decision.”).
We hold that we are bound by our decision in Pendergrast v. Sprint Nextel
Co., 691 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2012), to affirm the district court’s Order
compelling arbitration. See Vega-Castillo, 540 F.3d at 1236.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --