Posted on 04/12/2017 3:12:04 PM PDT by Morgana
Note: If he sues he will lose.
He was taken off after a request was made by the airline to debark. The validity of the request is not a legal matter — see the contact of carriage.
I think you have underestimated the disgust of the flying public regardless of the circumstances on flight 3411. We’re tired of being treated like cattle unless we pony up for a first class ticket. We’re rebelling against the idea that we have no recourse when we get through the security hassle. And we’re tired of having to pay the airline to haul our bags.
So when the jury returns from deliberating my hope is that the Doctor will be acquitted. It’s called nullification.
However - wasn’t there a nasty little problem a few years ago about one of the Boston physicians who was dealing with tainted blood? Harvard Medical if I remember correctly.
I don't recall that matter.But assuming you're correct I'd wager that he/she was licensed (in Massachusetts) at the time and wasn't a convicted felon.
How about me!
You made me abandon my vacation last week because you couldn't schedule a crew to fly the plane at your main hub, so after we all boarded the plane 45 minute before the time you originally rescheduled the airplane for, you kicked us off 15 minutes before that time because you said your crew timed out.
This was flight UA3426 from Newark to Cincinnati on Thursday April 6. United might claim that it was cancelled due to weather. But it was severe clear for five hours before they kicked us off the plane. In retrospect, I should have asked if there were any lawyers around as I was getting off the plane. (But my checked did make it to Cincinnati. And no, I don't vacation in Cincinnati. I was on my way to Lexington, KY, for the horse races there.)
ML/NJ
>>You have to be notified, in writing, for involuntary bumps. That wasn’t done. Breach.<<
Damages: ticket price.
Even that is no protection on United.
There was a business man a year or so ago, first class ticket from Hawaii. He had boarded and was having a drink when they told him that he was being bumped and if he didn't move it they were going to haul him off in handcuffs.
They ended up seating him back in economy class between a couple who were in the middle of a major argument.
They offered him a voucher for half his first class fare to be used on a future flight with them.
Yep, he is suing.
United - Come fly the nasty petty skies.
Before I label you a crazy nut-whack on this, I am going to need to know which one of United's sides you're inclined to side with? They have the "We did everything perfectly correct" side and the side where they fully regret everything with all their heart and soul. And in a couple days there's going to be another side where the CEO of United Airlines is resigning to spend more time with his family. So which is it?
It’s too late for me to find the information but there was an MD, I think associated with Harvard medical, who was involved with the French tainted blood scandal. He had a multi million dollar townhouse filled with art down off of Beacon Street. I’ll look for more info.
And then there was the guy at an un-named hospital in Boston who was from Columbia. Oops - slight misspelling. He was actually from Colombia, South America and not Columbia University. That tightened things up in the credentials office. LOL
And while we’re trashing Boston - didn’t they have a state medical lab that was run by someone who claimed to be a chemist who didn’t even have a degree? And that person decided randomly which drug test was positive or negative? (she loves me, she loves me not)
And then there is the Boston guy who recently was convicted of manufacturing tainted drugs. He’s in prison right now, right?
I'm inclined to side with United mainly because 1) my guess is that under contract law *and* Federal laws passed since 9/11 United was within its rights to do what they did and 2) the tirade alone shows this clown to be absolutely certifiable and reports confirmed by the LA Times (as I noted in an earlier post in this thread) strongly suggest that he's a filthy pig.
OTOH,this has been a PR nightmare for United.
I'd wager that United's Legal Department is saying "no problem" while its Marketing Dept is saying "Good God Almighty!"
I get the sense that you have something against Boston,Boston hospitals and/or Harvard Medical School.If my sense is correct all I can say is that even in Boston errors are made and shady and/or unqualified players appear.
But to return to *this* case it appears as if this doctor has a very shady past...medically and otherwise.
Just sayin'...
I'm not inclined to side with any airline that determines how they treat their customers by pushing the boundaries of how much physical abuse they can legally inflict on a customer.
I can’t believe this ever made it to the news. A mentally deranged passenger acted like a child and had to be dragged off the plane like a petulant child and 5 out 6 six are siding with the idiot passenger. What the heck is wrong with people!?
He was asked politely 3 times before physical removal was necessary. He had two choices. Leave the plane like a man or be dragged off like a toddler. He chose the latter. End of story.
"good toward the full price of a future flight with United Express(unless of course, United decides otherwise and 27 pages of fine print about still more loopholes)"
I’m sorry, but you gave no coherent answer which matches my question.
I’ll simplify this. You can choose:
1. United Airlines did everything perfectly correct. Piss on that Chinese doctor.
2. United Airlines has had second thoughts and is so very exceedingly sorry and moreover all of the passengers deserve compensation.
3. United Airlines is even more double-extra sorry than option #2 above, and is beheading their nitwit CEO while furiously trying to stop the bleeding during the height of the nation’s airline ticket buying season.
On months with a blue moon and only if you are flying the exact same route and are locked in a cage and bark three times as you are being loaded into the cargo hold.
I'm not a lawyer so I'm not qualified to answer this question (yes,legality is all that matters to me).I'm inclined to think that United *was* within its rights,legally,to demand that he leave the aircraft and,having refused to do so,they had the legal right to have him removed forcefully.
OTOH,if I'm wrong on that point my basic attitude would be at least a bit different...a bit more sympathetic to the guy.Not *entirely* sympathetic,mind you.His juvenile tirade was an absolute disgrace....an act that strongly points to a deep psychiatric disorder.In the same situation I would have,upon meeting the security people,stood up,walked with them and,as I was leaving,I would have said clearly yet calmly..."by the time I'm done I'll own this airline".
How about you? A tirade...or a calmly delivered promise of legal consequences?
Just askin'....
What they actually did was drag him from the plane, dump him on the ground, walk away.
The airline also had a couple of choices. They could 1) raise the money offer to all the passengers to voluntarily take a later flight until one passenger took them up on it, or 2) physically remove a passenger at random, knowing full well that videos of the removal of the passenger would be going viral all over social media. It takes a special kind of corporate stupid to make the choice they did.
Leave the plane like a man or be dragged off like a toddler.
1) Be a sheep and do what you're told regardless of how unjustly you feel you're being treated, or 2) resist what you consider to be unjust treatment.
End of story.
This story isn't close to being over. It remains to be seen if the guy forcibly removed will settle for a large payment from United, or whether he'll take the matter to trial and try for an even bigger payout.
Well, let's see. Which choice will get viral videos watched on social media to the point that it is covered and debated on all the news stations and even dozens of threads on FreeRepublic? By voluntarily complying when security showed up, I doubt your settlement with the airline would get into the six or seven figures ballpark, like this guy's settlement probably will.
You know,your comment brings something to my mind that never occurred to me.Here I was thinking that this guy was just bat $hit crazy when,in fact,he might have been "playing to the camera" with a big settlement in mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.