Curious update to our item of three days ago: Floyd Shuler, who slipped on an escalator after drinking on a flight, now says he “didn’t intend for the suit to be filed. ‘I learned about the filing of the lawsuit against US Airways … along with everyone else,’ Shuler said. ‘It was never my intent to take on the airline industry. I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused US Airways.’ Shuler’s attorney, Paul Kutcher, did not return a phone call from The Associated Press seeking comment.” (“Man Drops Suit Filed Against Airline After He Drank Booze, Fell”, AP/Tampa Bay Online, Apr. 1).
Posts Tagged ‘airlines’
Sues airline in tipsy escalator mishap
Floyd W. Shuler, 61, of West Virginia, is suing an airline “alleging it didn’t notify him that drinking alcohol at night might adversely affect passengers before he fell down an escalator at Southwest Florida International Airport.” “US Airways failed to warn (Shuler) and its other passengers of the increased effect that consumption of alcoholic beverages has on airline passengers who consume alcoholic beverages while in flight and while flying at night,” according to the lawsuit, which was filed in Fort Myers. The suit also claims the escalator stopped unexpectedly after Shuler stepped onto it and that it was improperly maintained. (Kristen Zambo, “Man sues airline after falling down escalator after drinking on flight”, Naples Daily News, Mar. 31)(see Dec. 17, Oct. 13, Aug. 8, Jul. 30, Jul. 21; many more tipple-your-way-to-court cases). Update Apr. 3: Shuler says he never intended to sue.
“Tall passengers come up short in lawsuit”
“A California Court of Appeals panel rejected a lawsuit against several airlines, including American and Southwest, by the Tall Club of Silicon Valley which sought preferential seating in roomier exit rows for men at least 6 foot, 2 inches and women at least 5 foot, 10 inches.” (Reuters/Houston Chronicle, Mar. 3)(via Legal Humour)(& letter to the editor, Apr. 2).
Update: Oz court nixes DVT suit
Bad news for lawyers suing airlines over “economy-class syndrome” (see Dec. 13-14, 2000): an Australian court of appeal has disallowed a test case against Qantas and British Airways over the deep vein thrombosis suffered by a passenger after a long flight. Brian William Povey, a Sydney businessman, “had alleged that flight conditions — including a confined and restricted physical environment, impediments to getting out of his seat, a lack of warning about the risk of DVT, and the supply of alcohol — had caused his injury.” (Peter Gregory, “DVT damages claims in doubt”, Melbourne Age, Dec. 24). The judgment was consistent with a court decision in Britain; a U.S. federal judge in San Francisco, on the other hand, has allowed such claims to proceed (see Aug. 16). Update Sept. 12: high court agrees to review case.
From a kit (no lawyer included)
Experimental aircraft assembled from kits are rising in popularity, aimed at accommodating owner-pilots “who want a new high-performance aircraft without shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars”. “The fact is, there just aren’t that many new production airplanes,” says Bob Warner, executive vice president of the Experimental Aircraft Association. “Part of the price in the production-built airplane is you’re paying for a bunch of lawyers and a bunch of insurance.” (Jon Bonn?, “‘Experimental’ aircraft push the envelope”, MSNBC, Dec. 15).
“Can’t get upgraded? Sue”
A California resident has brought an intended class-action lawsuit “against Korean Air, arguing the airline company charged him an extra $200 for his ticket when he asked the company to upgrade his economy-class ticket to a business-class one using his accumulated flying mileage.” (Byun Duk-kun, “Korean Air Faces Class Action for `Unfair Mileage Program'”, Korea Times, Oct. 3). Gary Leff at Webflyer comments (Oct. 4). More commentary on frequent-flier-program class actions: Chris McGinnis, “The frequent traveler: Angry fliers challenge Delta over miles-selling”, TravelSkills.com, Feb. 7; Greg Scandlen, “Lawyers Fly High By Suing Airline On Behalf Of Non-Complaining Passengers”, National Center for Policy Analysis “Idea House”, Aug. 10, 2000.
Did a lawsuit kill Wilbur Wright?
The great aviation pioneer, who died of typhoid fever in 1912 at age 45, spent his last years enmeshed in bitter litigation with rival Glenn Curtiss. “Wilbur did not survive the litigation. In an official history [of intellectual property law firm Fish & Neave, the firm’s resident historian Albert E.] Fey wrote, ‘In the interest of full disclosure, I must tell you that the Wright Brothers case went on for so long it may have killed Wilbur in the process. A little known fact is that we dragged him to Boston for a deposition, where he became ill. He never recovered.'” (James V. Grimaldi, “After Historic Flight, Wrights Went to Court”, Washington Post, Sept. 21(via Ernie the Attorney who got it from Dennis Kennedy)(& welcome Law.com readers)
“Grief does not justify greed”
A few more excerpts from Gregg Easterbrook’s devastating commentary of yesterday: “Now some 9/11 families are saying $1.6 million isn’t enough. Set aside whether they should be receiving anything from taxpayers, given the myriad other circumstances in which Americans die in various horrible events every bit as traumatic and devastating to their families, who receive nothing at all. Assume for the sake of argument that something about 9/11 justifies offering victims’ estates a very large special payment. Yet some 9/11 families are saying very large is not large enough. … If the families for whom $6.1 million is not enough persist in their avaricious desire to sue — and if the lawyers who would get shares of court awards, but get no shares of federal fund awards, persist in their ghoulish desire to encourage such suits–the country’s two largest airlines, and largest aircraft manufacturer, may fail. This will cause significant harm the United States. And it seems unlikely that the dying thoughts of the noble victims of 9/11 were, ‘I hope my survivors really screw the United States for money.'” (unnamed new Gregg Easterbrook weblog, The New Republic, Sept. 10). See also Apr. 1-2, 2002 (Roger Parloff); Nov. 21-22, 2001; John Lehmann, “Rush to file $uits”, New York Post, Sept. 11 (Lisa Beamer and other survivors suing airport screening equipment makers).
9/11 lawsuit moves forward
Gregg Easterbrook, in his new blog for The New Republic, is critical of the lawsuit against airlines over 9/11 and a recent decision of a federal judge to permit that lawsuit to go forward:
We were all going through those checkpoints and riding on those planes, all as a society sharing the risk–including the federal judge who himself was getting on those planes though he now says it could have reasonably been foreseen they would be crashed into buildings. How odd he himself didn’t foresee it. (Sep. 10).
Judge Hellerstein’s Sep. 9 opinion is on-line.
Update: airline blood-clot suits advance
“The drive to make airlines responsible for passengers who develop deep vein thrombosis — the potentially deadly blood clots often linked to long flights — is picking up momentum with a federal court judge’s refusal to dismiss two lawsuits.” Federal judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco ruled last month that lawsuits could proceed on behalf of two passengers on trans-Atlantic flights who developed blood clots after sitting for hours with minimal leg movement — “economy class syndrome”, as the nickname would have it (see Dec. 13-14, 2000). (Arianne Aryanpur, “‘Economy Class Syndrome’ Lawsuits Against Airlines Can Move Forward”. USA Today/Good Housekeeping, Jul. 29).