Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: freedumb2003

“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.”

Actually - he will win.
United’s Contract of Carriage (COC - required by 14 CFR 253 -often referred to as the “fine print”) includes two distinct sections: Rule 21 entitled “Refusal of Transport,” and Rule 25 entitled “Denied Boarding Compensation.”

United cited Rule 25 incorrectly - while there are several issues with this rule such as the order for determining the losers (”may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment” while in this case they did a “lottery”) the passengers had in fact already boarded (and been seated) and could not be forced from their seats (they could have volunteered - free market solution - but United wasn’t willing to let the free market decide).

Rule 21 does address removal of a person from an aircraft for many reasons. None were cited by United. The fact he refused an illegal order and resisted will not be sufficient.

The vast majority recognize they could have been in his position so whether or not he has something in his past is irrelevant.

United is going to lose. Bigtime.

And if the lawyers are very smart they should seek a class action - find others who were forced out of their seats by United, likely will find a pattern of late arriving flight crews needing transport. Guess this is what happens when the inmates run the asylum (consider employee ownership of United issues).


25 posted on 04/12/2017 3:25:17 PM PDT by LibertyOh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: LibertyOh
-- United is going to lose. --

From what I see, you've argued that UAL breached the contract of carriage. Okay, so they lose. What is the remedy and what are the damages? See too, Rule 28.

38 posted on 04/12/2017 3:31:12 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: LibertyOh

Agree. Great post.

CEO Munuz’ resignation is the FIRST step in repairing this PR nightmare.

A complete company culture overhaul is second.

Offering reimbursements to the entire flight....who GOT to stay in their seats/make flight....is just another absurd decision.


45 posted on 04/12/2017 3:34:17 PM PDT by Jane Long (Praise God, from whom ALL blessings flow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: LibertyOh

Thank you for doing this.

If I were the Dr., I would tell my lawyers that you either keep this a non-class case, or I walk.

Class action suits take forever, and the only winners are the lawyers, period.


77 posted on 04/12/2017 3:57:11 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Truth, in a time of universal deceit, is courage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: LibertyOh
And if the lawyers are very smart they should seek a class action...

Dr. Dao is being represented by one of the top aviation litigators in the country. In the second largest individual settlement won by his attorney United airlines paid $25 million dollars to settle a wrongful death suit. I suspect United already knows they have an expensive problem on their hands, particularly now that they have admitted that the plane wasn't actually overbooked.

78 posted on 04/12/2017 3:58:41 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson