SeaWorld Orlando Mako Lawsuit: Martin’s Claims and Dismissal

A Florida judge dismissed the SeaWorld Mako roller coaster bird lawsuit in January 2026, ruling that the midair bird strike that knocked rider Hillary Martin unconscious was not reasonably foreseeable and fell outside the park’s control. The plaintiff was given 20 days to amend her complaint and refile.¹

What Happened on the Ride

On March 24, 2025, Hillary Martin, a resident of Orange County, Florida, was riding Mako, a steel hypercoaster that reaches 73 miles per hour and climbs 200 feet above SeaWorld Orlando’s central lagoon.² A bird flew into the coaster’s path and hit her in the face, knocking her unconscious.³ Martin’s lawsuit described the animal as a duck. SeaWorld later identified it as a snowy egret, a wild migratory bird.⁴

According to SeaWorld’s later court filings, Martin declined medical transport at the park that day, saying she wanted to stay, and did not seek medical treatment until the following day.⁵

What Martin Sued For

Martin filed suit on October 27, 2025, in Orange County Circuit Court, naming SeaWorld Orlando and its parent company, United Parks & Resorts, as defendants.⁶³⁷

The complaint alleged that SeaWorld failed to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition by running a high-speed coaster close to a body of water, creating what her attorneys called a “zone of danger for bird strikes.” It also claimed the ride’s design could disorient waterfowl and that SeaWorld failed to warn guests of the risk.³

Martin alleged permanent physical injuries, disfigurement, and loss of earning power.⁸ Her injuries required stitches to her forehead, and she said she developed post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety disorder.⁹ The suit further claimed a loss of her ability to lead and enjoy a normal life.⁶

How SeaWorld Responded

SeaWorld filed its motion to dismiss on November 19, 2025.⁵ The park built its defense on two arguments. First, the bird was a snowy egret, a wild migratory species the park did not possess, harbor, or introduce. Second, the collision was not reasonably foreseeable. The motion argued that “the presence of water ‘near’ the coaster does not render a random aerial bird strike reasonably foreseeable as a matter of law” and that the complaint “attempts to turn general risk into specific foreseeability without the legal ability to do so.” SeaWorld also pointed out that Martin offered no evidence the bird was visible or known to park staff before the coaster left the station.

Those arguments track an established principle in Florida premises liability law called the doctrine of ferae naturae. Landowners generally are not required to protect visitors from harm caused by wild animals unless they have taken the animals into possession, harbored them, or introduced a non-native species. Courts have also held that the duty depends on whether the owner’s knowledge of the danger was superior to that of the visitor.¹⁰

How the Judge Ruled

Orange Circuit Judge Margaret Schreiber granted the motion to dismiss.¹¹ The ruling, reported on January 7, 2026, found the bird strike unforeseeable and outside the park’s control.¹

Dismissal was not necessarily the final word. Martin was given 20 days to amend and refile her complaint. A trial date of November 8, 2027, had previously been set in the case, though whether her legal team refiled an amended complaint has not been publicly reported as of early 2026.³

A Separate Mako Lawsuit the Same Year

Martin’s case was not the only 2025 lawsuit over an injury on Mako, and the two are easy to confuse. In September 2025, David Stafford of Hillsborough County sued SeaWorld on behalf of his nine-year-old daughter, alleging she was struck in the forehead on March 15, 2025, by an airborne object dropped by another rider.¹² A follow-up report suggested the object was suspected to be a vape battery, though the lawsuit did not identify it definitively.¹³ Judge Schreiber also dismissed the Stafford case, with leave to amend and refile.¹¹

1
Click Orlando. Court Grants SeaWorld Orlando Request to Dismiss Coaster Duck Strike Lawsuit
2
SeaWorld Orlando. Mako Roller Coaster
3
ABC News. Woman Sues SeaWorld After Being Knocked Unconscious by Duck on Roller Coaster
4
Fox 35 Orlando. SeaWorld Orlando Files Motion to Dismiss Duck Lawsuit
5
Click Orlando. SeaWorld Orlando Responds to Coaster Rider’s Duck Lawsuit
6
Post-Crescent. Woman Sues SeaWorld for Injuries Sustained on Roller Coaster by a Duck
7
WAFB. Woman Files Lawsuit Against SeaWorld After Duck Allegedly Hit Her on Roller Coaster
8
New York Post. SeaWorld Sued After Woman Knocked Unconscious by Duck on Roller Coaster
9
People. Woman Sues SeaWorld Orlando Claiming Duck Hit Her Face on Roller Coaster
10
The Florida Bar Journal. Lions, Tigers, and Bears, Oh My: Owner and HOA Liability for Wild Animal Attacks
11
Florida Politics. Woman Sues SeaWorld, Says She Was Hit in the Face by a Duck on Mako Coaster
12
Florida Politics. Child Hit in the Face by Item on SeaWorld Roller Coaster, Lawsuit Says
13
Florida Politics. Was Somebody Vaping on a SeaWorld Roller Coaster When a Child Got Hurt?