“To the extent that its 9/11 attacks were designed to drive a wedge between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia and shake the Saudi regime, Al-Qaeda succeeded beyond it wildest dreams. … [The Saudi establishment] finds itself under siege not only by Western journalists and politicians, but also by the American plaintiffs’ bar, in the form of a civil lawsuit filed by 17 law firms from seven states in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, demanding $116 trillion in damages on behalf of over 3,000 9/11 victims and their families.” Christopher H. Johnson of Artur & Hadden, co-chair of the American Bar Association’s Middle East Committee, offers a critique of the litigation (“Terrorism as Mass Tort: Responsibility for 9/11”, Saudi-American Forum, Essay Series #3). See Sept. 26 and links from there.
Posts Tagged ‘airlines’
Update: billions demanded over WTC cleanup health effects
“Hundreds of people who worked on the World Trade Center cleanup have filed a class action lawsuit against the leaseholder of the towers and those who supervised the job, alleging they did little to protect workers from dust, asbestos and other toxins in the air. … David Worby, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said he will seek billions of dollars” from Silverstein Properties and four construction companies that oversaw the removal of 1.5 million tons of debris, no doubt teaching a lesson to future construction companies so rash as to volunteer their services for an emergency mission. A spokesman for Silverstein “said the cleanup was conducted by the city and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. ‘We had no control over that operation and no ability to supervise what safety precautions were taken’.” (Karen Matthews, “Class Action Filed Over Health Effects of World Trade Center Cleanup”, AP/Law.com, Sept. 14). See also Nov. 21-22, 2001.
Update: “economy-class syndrome” suits
Suits over deep-vein thrombosis suffered by inactive passengers on long-distance flights looked not long ago as if they might become a major source of liability for airlines, but “appellate decisions in California and Texas have encouraged airlines to defend DVT cases in court, rather than begin a parade of potentially large settlements.” (Justin Scheck, “New Tort Encounters Turbulence”, The Recorder, Sept. 17). See Aug. 16, 2003; Sept. 12, 2004 (Australia).
9/11 fund may have been a mistake
Even Ken Feinberg, the man who ran it, acknowledges as much. Must-read column from Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby (“Why the 9/11 fund was a mistake”, Sept. 27). One remarkable passage among many:
“You would get situations like this,” Feinberg said. ” `Mr. Feinberg, I’m the brother of the victim. Don’t let my sister get a nickel. The victim hated his sister, trust me.’ Then the sister comes in. `Is my brother spreading rumors. . .? My [deceased] brother and I loved each other.’
“Or: `Mr. Feinberg, I’m the biological parent of my son who was killed. Don’t you dare give the fiancee any money. That marriage was never going to take place.’ Then the fiancee comes in. `We were going to be married on October 11th.’ And you go back to the biological parent. `They were going to be married October 11th. You threw a shower for them. You said you were gaining a daughter, not losing a son.’ `Yeah, but on Sept. 10, my son told me it was off.’ “
Update: Oz high court agrees to review DVT case
Australia’s high court has agreed to review an appellate court decision (see Dec. 28) disallowing a a test case against Qantas and British Airways over so-called economy-class syndrome, the deep vein thrombosis suffered by a passenger after a long flight. A decision in favor of the claimant, businessman Brian Povey, could open the door to many more such suits against Australian airlines. (Ian Munro, “DVT case could open floodgates to stricken fliers”, Melbourne Age, Sept. 11). Update Jun. 25, 2005: high court dismisses case.
Prescod: We get mail
Lost luggage lawsuit
What do you think of when you hear someone has been killed in an airplane accident? Earlier this year, in Olympic Airways v. Husain, the Supreme Court (in a Justice Thomas opinion over a Justice Scalia dissent) expanded the definition of “accident” in the Warsaw Convention (which allows damages recovery for international air travelers) to include an “event” where a flight attendant refused to reseat someone having an allergic reaction to cigarette smoke (though permitting the person to move himself). Olympic Airways is perhaps best understood as the epitome of the cliche “hard cases make bad law.” It is already bearing fruit for plaintiffs with even more remote claims.
On December 14, 1997, 75-year-old Caroline Neischer, a trained nurse and former smoker with chronic respiratory problems (including, claims the defense and some medical reports, emphysema), flew from Los Angeles to Guyana. At her connecting flight, she permitted an airline employee to check her carry-on suitcase, which contained a nebulizer and medication. When the flight arrived on December 15, the suitcase (along with four other checked bags) didn’t; they didn’t arrive until 6 a.m. on December 17. Though medicine and a substitute nebulizer was available in Guyana (apparently for $2), Neischer and her family waited for the luggage to arrive, and didn’t take Neischer to a doctor. On December 18, Neischer went to the hospital with breathing problems, and died on December 23, with the plaintiffs claiming she made a deathbed declaration blaming her death on the airline. Though the Guyana hospital lost some of the medical records, the plaintiffs won the battle of the experts, even though their theory had to account for the fact that it was inconsistent with the cause of death listed on Neischer’s death certificate. (Interestingly, though this was a federal case involving an international treaty, the Ninth Circuit referred to state law standards of “competent medical testimony” in dismissing the defense’s challenge to the expert.)
This, according to the plaintiffs, district court, and Ninth Circuit, qualifies as “wilful misconduct” by the airline. Under the Warsaw Convention, the airline cannot defend itself by pointing to the substandard care provided by the Guyanese hospital. The district court simply awarded damages; the Ninth Circuit asked the lower court to consider what degree Neischer was responsible for her own death for not spending $2 on another nebulizer. (“Court Finds Airline at Fault in Woman’s Death”, Reuters, Aug. 19; Prescod v. AMR, Inc.).
NTSB says no defect, jury says $44 million
“Parker Hannifin Corp. of Cleveland, the world’s largest maker of hydraulic equipment, was told by a Los Angeles jury to pay $43.6 million to the families of three people killed in a 1997 SilkAir crash in Indonesia.
“The Los Angeles Superior Court jury yesterday determined that defects in a rudder control system caused the Boeing 737 to plunge from 35,000 feet, killing all 104 people aboard. The National Transportation Safety Board concluded that there were no mechanical defects and the pilot intentionally caused the crash.” Boeing and SilkAir had already settled out, and the jury refused to apportion any fault to them. “‘We are incredulous,’ said Lorrie Paul Crum, a spokeswoman for Cleveland-based Parker Hannifin, who said the company will appeal. ‘This is the best case for tort reform I’ve seen yet.'” (“Parker Hannifin will appeal jury award”, Akron Beacon Journal, Jul. 8). “The trial established Parker Hannifin’s liability and relatives of about 30 other people will now go to trial in the same Los Angeles court to determine how much Parker Hannifin owes them in damages, [said Walter Lack of Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack, attorney for the families]”. Parker Hannifin says it plans to appeal. (“SilkAir crash: US firm told to pay US$44m”, Business Times of Singapore, Jul. 9).
Canada: no psychic-trauma damages for rescuer
“A former Canadian sailor will not be allowed to sue Swissair for the trauma he suffered following the crash of Flight 111 in 1998, a Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge ruled today. Lorne Joudrey, 40, had argued that the airline should compensate him for the psychological damage that resulted from his role in the recovery operation in the days after the jet plunged into the ocean near Peggy’s Cove, N.S., killing all 229 people aboard.” (“Ex-sailor can’t sue Swissair over trauma”, Canadian Press/Toronto Star, Jul. 7). For a similar ruling from a federal judge in New Mexico, see Apr. 1.
“Gatekeeper awards” from Common Good
Common Good, the advocacy group chaired by author Philip K. Howard (The Death of Common Sense, The Collapse of the Common Good) and whose motto is “Reforming America’s Lawsuit Culture”, on Apr. 8 announced its first “Gatekeeper Awards” honoring judges who throw out lawsuits that would better never have been filed. Among the cases praised: a Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinion excluding scientific testimony to the effect that Doritos, the snack food, is intrinsically unsafe in texture; a Virginia high court ruling upholding assumption of risk in the case of a baseball spectator hit by a ball; a Third Circuit decision holding that a “public school third-grader cannot sue for being prevented from soliciting classmates’ signatures for a petition opposing a voluntary class trip to the circus”; an Eighth Circuit opinion excluding punitive damages in the case of a patently accidental air crash; and the Nevada Supreme Court’s ruling (see Nov. 7) that a passenger cannot sue a homeowner over injuries sustained when a car crashed into a flowerbed.