 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Rubin v. United Air Lines2/20/2002
tion. When detained during the layover the passenger admitted he could not independently confirm his identity. He had left his driver's license in the glove compartment of his car then parked at the airport and did not carry either his birth certificate or social security card on his person. The passenger was eventually permitted to return home.
The appellate court concluded the passenger's claims were either preempted or not actionable and granted summary judgment in favor of the airline. In so doing the court noted, "Air travel in modern society presents formidable safety and security concerns and often passengers with criminal intentions are the source of that threat. Federal law-in conjunction with its broad preemption of state-law claims related to airlines' services-appropriately grants airlines latitude in making decisions necessary to safeguard passengers from potential security threats. Section 44902(b) recognizes airlines' boarding practices as a specific area of federal concern." Because the passenger had breached the airline's security measures, the court held the airline was justified in refusing him passage.
By contrast, where an airline refused to allow a passenger to reboard the plane after a stopover on grounds he had insulted the captain and crew, the court in Cordero v. CIA Mexicana de Aviacion, S.A. upheld the jury's finding the airline had acted unreasonably in failing to investigate the passenger's claim he had been mistaken for another disorderly passenger. Accordingly, the court found section 44902 of the FAA did not shield the airline from liability. On a flight, which had already been delayed, the pilot announced an unscheduled stop and one passenger shouted insults at the pilot. At the airport during the stop, the plaintiff circulated a petition complaining about the delay. Airline personnel then prevented the plaintiff from reboarding, claiming he was the one who had insulted the pilot. The airline refused to investigate his claim of mistaken identity and excluded him from the flight. The Ninth Circuit reversed the judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the airline, finding ample evidence in the trial record from which the jury might have concluded the airline acted unreasonably in excluding the plaintiff "without even the most cursory inquiry into the complaint against him."
Schaeffer v. Cavallero is another decision in which the court found an airline had failed to demonstrate a reasonable basis for refusing passage. In Schaeffer a passenger became very upset when a flight attendant told him one of his two bags had to be checked. He relented but when he did not receive a receipt for his bag he "so vociferously pursued his demand for the receipt" he was asked to deplane. He refused to leave the plane and had to be physically removed by the police. The passenger brought suit for battery, false imprisonment and other claims. The trial court denied the airline's motion for summary judgment finding it a triable issue of material fact whether the airline had acted reasonably. The court found a reasonable jury could conclude he was removed from the plane, not because he posed a safety risk, but in retaliation for his verbal protests, in which case the airline's action would be arbitrary and capricious.
After trial the court clarified its rulings. The court acknowledged airlines have broad discretion under section 44902 of the FAA to refuse to transport passengers the airline believes are or might be inimical to safety. "But to say (as defendants essentially argue) that any time an impolite or unpleasant passenger debates a non-safety issue with an airline employee in a boisterous or abusive manner he automatically poses a potent
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|