LOL! 2015's come and gone! Where's my flying car! :-)
Posted on 04/14/2017 3:11:24 PM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
The passenger who was forcibly removed from a United Airlines flight by aviation security officials Sunday garnered much public sympathy in the days since video emerged of him being dragged, bloody and screaming, down the aisle of a plane. David Dao, 69, retained a lawyer and filed a petition with an Illinois court to get all evidence related to the incident preserved.
While a lawsuit wasn't filed, Dao’s lawyer confirmed in a press conference Thursday there would likely be one, which begs the question: In the wake of such a high-profile, controversial incident, how much will Dao get?
“Dr. Dao will likely get millions here,” James Goodnow, an attorney with the Lamber-Goodnow Injury Law Team at Fennemore Craig, who is licensed in Chicago, told International Business Times in an interview Thursday. “The only question is how many zeros will follow the first number.”
Dao has a number of claims against both the city of Chicago and United. First and foremost, he has an assault and battery case.
“This is going to be a slam dunk, a no-brainer, an easy win,” Goodnow told IBT. “It’s documented on multiple cell phones. There’s no question.
Other claims will likely include breach of contract, false imprisonment, defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
“That’s just a big fancy way of saying that the officers involved, and/or United Airlines, intentionally engaged in outrageous conduct that could be expected to have an emotional impact on Dr. Dao,” said Goodnow. “I think most people would consider this conduct outrageous and I think there’s little question Dao has suffered emotionally.”
There is no specific monetary cap in Chicago on what a plaintiff can get. Dao would likely collect on an array of damages including medical bills, lost wages and general damages, which include those things that can’t be quantified, like emotional distress and pain and suffering. Illinois is one of the most restrictive places in the country when it comes to punitive damages, which refer to damages awarded to punish wrongdoers and deter future wrong conduct, so lawyers would have to look elsewhere for a larger payday.
“The real money is going to come in the area of emotional distress damages — the pain and suffering. We call those general damages,” said Goodnow. “That’s where you can juice this up from a monetary perspective.”
In a typical personal injury case, Goodnow explained, a general rule of thumb is that plaintiffs are rewarded three to four times his or her medical bills. In a case where a client’s past and future medical bills are estimated to be about $100,000, the payout would likely be somewhere between $300,000 and $400,000. Not so for Dao, namely because the case will almost certainly never make it to court.
“What you will see here is a settlement value that will blow away anything Dr. Dao will ever recover in court,” said Goodnow.
Because of the nature of the case and the intense public scrutiny, United will likely be motivated to aim for a settlement, which will garner a larger payout for Dao than a trial would. The company has already become the subject of numerous boycotts, internet mocking and a plunging stock price and can’t afford to be at the center of yet another controversy.
“Look at the attention this case has received in just a few days,” said Goodnow. “Imagine what would happen if you have a public trial and every reporter is covering it. Every day will be another paper cut for United.”
The mistakes made by United after the incident will presumably benefit Dao. At least, from a monetary standpoint.
Instead of apologizing to Dao, the airline said it was sorry for having to “re-accommodate” passengers in their first statement. They were the subject of swift backlash by people who took issue with the phrasing. In a different memo to employees, which was obtained by the media, CEO Oscar Munoz appeared to blame Dao for being “disruptive and belligerent” and leaving the crew “no choice” but to call aviation security to forcibly remove him, though video recorded right before the incident suggested otherwise.
“All of these missteps are going to enter into the equation when United is deciding how much to pay here,” said Goodnow. “If United insults Dr. Dao and his legal team with a 'lowball' offer, they risk an ever greater backlash. If that information were to leak out, it would be so damaging if it looks like, in the face of this, United is trying to get out on the cheap.”
Munoz issued yet another statement from the company Tuesday in which he took “full responsibility” and pledged to make the situation right.
“I don’t think United’s legal team is going to try and 'lowball' Dr. Dao here,” said Goodnow. “I think they’re going to come in with the biggest number they can to get this put to bed as soon as possible.”
Close, but no cigar. The management of the dealership will call some rent-a-cops who will Tazer you, break your front teeth, your nose and sinuses, and give you a concussion before dragging your ass out of the car in front of your family. Then the dealership will send a memo to its employees praising them, demeaning you, and have its attorneys spread disinformation about you to the internet.
Until, of course, other customers spread videos of what the rent-a-cop goons actually did. Then the dealership does a 180.
The dealership called the cops, and the cops beat the shit out of you.
No court is going to accept an argument that calling the cops is tantamount to calling for a beat down. Both parties have the ability keep the cops from showing up, and Dao has more control over how things proceed when the cops show up. At that point, UAL has no control.
Uh no! If you watch the whole video he blames United and says he will no longer fly United.
Here’s an idea. Advise UAL that they should amend their ToS. Instead of giving boarded passengers a legal right to their seats, it should direct them to initiate litigation if they’re expelled after boarding. A ‘clarification’ like that should satisfy you.
I’d “bet” there is a Vegas line on it.
Hey, is that recursive programming? (for all the software development geeks among us).
I’d wager he’ll get $2.5M.
Because it is not up to Dao. Once United orders him leave the plane, he must leave. He can't fight with them, he can't impose conditions on them. He must leave.
Yes, he can sue them for breach of contract, and collect his money. That is his only legal remedy. He doesn't have the legal right to stand up and say, come and get me, I'm physically defending this seat against any one who tries to take it from me!
The analogy doesn’t work anyway.
The dealership never promised to fly you from Chicago to Louisville.
UAL is gonna pay up.
See post 124. You’re still pushing United to change their ToS. Sooner or later you’ll realize your argument is with them, not me.
Answer: a cop.
UAL knew the likelihood of a violent result.
It will be millions.
He wasn’t bumped. The plane was not overbooked. He was removed from the flight to make room for the airline’s employees. Punitive damages would be available.
Even though airlines treat their customers like garbage, they do try to maximize the nimber of people they move, and minimize the number of people they strand/delay. It's a business judgment to strand passengers in one place, in order to get their crews around. They know they really alienate some customers, and they are willing to take those lumps.
http://openjurist.org/626/f2d/1031/nader-v-allegheny-airlines-inc
But Nader never boarded and wasn’t seated on the aircraft.
And it may very well be easier to prove malice and disregard with United.
LOL! 2015's come and gone! Where's my flying car! :-)
They don’t have to amend anything. It is already the law that passengers do not have a property right in their seat, they merely have contractual rights.
Under contract law, a general principle is that you only get money damages for breaching your contract rights.
There are very limited exceptions in law in which you can force someone to perform a contract instead of paying your money damages from breaching, for example a contract to buy a unique piece of land.
But the general rule is your only right on breach is to be paid your money damages. You don’t have the right to take physical possession of an airline seat and physically defend it from airline personnel upon being given an order by the airline for you to remove yourself from their plane.
It won’t be much because UA didn’t do much. They did not remove him from the plane. The CDA, law enforcement, did the deed. He resisted and had to be forcibly removed. UA may have been wrong in having him removed but that is a matter of contract law. I don’t see how what he did is any different than than disobeying a police order. The police may be wrong but the time to argue is after you comply with their order.
Just like this guy, I was removed by UA from a flight after being seated. I guess I should have went the drama queen route and caused a law enforcement incident and then cried foul.
UA will let this die down, slowly litigate it, and then after it is forgotten drop the hammer on him. He deserves nothing.
I despise UA and will not fly them. It is a mean and petty airline.
Your stance on this incident is in the minority, not supported by facts and is wholly incorrect-legally and morally.
Time to surrender.
Agreed, and it may be accepted - if Dao's litigation team calculates a larger gain with a separate claim/lawsuit against Chicago.
It will be interesting to see how Dao's litigation team aligns the defendants. United, with its public face and checkbook in hand, would appear to be the easy money and Chicago the deep pockets.
IMO, it seems clear airport security used unreasonable force and caused the greater, longer-lasting physical and emotional damage. It has been reported that security force is not on a par with regular LEO's and not as qualified.
(These guys were like untrained bar bouncers. Well-trained operators could have "escorted" Dao happily off the flight with a simple arm, wrist or finger lock.)
We shall see what happens.
Do you believe this policy remains in place?
Do you believe this passenger was beat up in his removal?
Do you believe this is how you get your employees from point A to point B?
This is clearly an airline problem. It is not a passenger problem. Put a checkbox on that booking that says you will clearly take 2,000 to give up your seat. Solved.
This will cost millions.
I have two thoughts on that.
The gate agents called the police who have jurisdiction to deal with uncooperative passengers. I doubt they have a menu to choose from, "thug police" vs. "negotiate while the plane waits" police.
Second, what makes you think ANY police is going to litigate the case while the plane sites there? Between UAL and a passenger, UAL is calling the shots. If Dao wants his own cops there to take the other side, it's on him to call HIS police.
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.