 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Scully v. American Airlines2/21/2003
even though he was injured on the domestic portion of the flight. . . ." Lemly v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 807 F.2d 26, 27 (2d Cir. 1986).
In Manion, supra, the plaintiff scheduled two consecutive flights C one from Chicago to Boston and one from Boston to Ireland. His return flights connected from Ireland to New York and from New Your to Washington D.C. The plaintiff's itinerary included all of the outgoing and return tickets. The district court viewed this fact to be evidence of international travel, which was "also substantiated by the fact that there was an insignificant time difference between the initial and subsequent flight, and the fact that the original carrier was aware of the passenger's subsequent flight plans." Id.at4. (Citations omitted). Therefore, the court concluded that the plaintiff's flight from Chicago to Boston qualified as "international transportation" that was governed by the Warsaw Convention.
Similarly, the Scullys' itinerary clearly indicates travel from Trinidad to an ultimate destination in Northern Kentucky. There were only insignificant time delays between the initial flight and subsequent connections both in Miami and in Chicago . Scully remained with the same carrier throughout the trip. American was also aware of the international nature of Patrick's travel plans. The trial court did not err by concluding that the Warsaw Convention governed this claim, thereby preempting the state law cause of action.
The Scullys also argue that the trial court erred by concluding that the Warsaw Convention applies to this action since American cannot show that it met the ticket requirements described in the Convention. Again, we disagree.
Under the terms of the Convention, the ticket must contain a statement in 10-point type that the transportation was subject to the rules relating to liability as established by the Convention. American claims that its ticket jackets for all international flights are in compliance and that it advises customers that the transportation is subject to the terms of the Warsaw Convention. However, a copy of Patrick's ticket was not available as he had disposed of it. The Convention addresses that contingency as well: "The absence, irregularity, or loss of the passenger ticket shall not affect the existence or the validity of the contract of transportation, which shall nonetheless be subject to the rules of this convention." Art. 3(2), 49 U.S.C. ยง 40105. The trial court did not err by concluding that the terms of the Convention apply despite the fact that Patrick's ticket could not be produced for inspection.
Finally, the Scullys argue that dismissal was improper regardless of whether the Warsaw Convention applies since it does not does preempt state law causes of action. The preemptive effect of the Convention appears to the sole basis of the trial court's order dismissing the action.
As we noted above, the U.S. Supreme Court has directly and unequivocally addressed that argument. In Tsui Yuan Tseng, supra, the Supreme Court held that the terms of the Warsaw Convention preclude a passenger from asserting under state law any personal injury claims resulting from international air transportation. Consequently, the trial court did not err by concluding that resort to state tort law was precluded where the Warsaw Convention expressly applied.
The judgment of the Boone Circuit Court is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
Page 1 2 Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|