Posted on 04/14/2017 3:11:24 PM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
Be my guest.
United’s ToS says they once a passenger is boarded, they can be deplaned for disruptive behavior. Dao wasn’t being disruptive. Take it up with United.
There will be at least two settlements.
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if there’s another suit against the airplane manufacturer.
You'd think a lawyer would know the difference between a number and a digit.
It'll be the first case in history where calling the cops, whatever label you want to pin on them, results in liability to the caller, for a beat down administered by the cops.
‘It wont be much’
I bet you’ll be surprised.
No. This is United's mess. They own and they'll pay for it. The Aviation Security Unit will share some of the blame, but United is responsible for this mess.
“Im sure that introducing Dr Doas face to the armrest was a legitimate police tactic.”
No, no, no. Clear evidence of a design flaw. The suit against Boeing (or whoever) will be coming right after the city settles, which will be right after United settles.
Some Freepers would have you believe so.
I don’t care if I’m in the minority or not.
The correctness of an argument does not depend on the number of people agreeing or disagreeing with it.
Yep, we’re never going to know. Seems like we never get to find out in the juicy ones.
While I understand everybody taking up the rights of UAL,
I have had it with the thugs that run the airlines and the airports.
You do not have the expectation of being beaten to a pulp with contract in hand.
UAL is the parent contractor and will pay. Any pilot could have bumped that rate to 1500 and the issue is over.
Lets take the case of an Uber driver. Dao calls and puts in an order to pick him up at LaGuardia and drive him to Staten Island.
The driver picks Dao up but halfway to getting to the destination, the driver gets a phone call. It is either (1) a medical emergency by the drivers wife and he must immediately drive home or there is great risk or (2) a buddy of the driver calls and says he got Yankees-Red Sox tix but you gotta get here now, or Im giving your ticket to Joey. It doesnt matter which one it is.
So the driver immediately stops the car halfway there, and tells Dao to get out.
****
Of course Dao has to get out. Its not his car. He can sue for damages, he can file a complaint with consumer affairs, he can organize a picket protest of Ubers office. He can do a lot of things, but one thing he cannot do is fight with the car owner and refuse to leave the back seat of the car.
Totally wrong. Once a carrier is transporting someone to a destination, they have a legal and fiduciary duty to act with proper care to get the passenger to his or her destination. If you’re not misbehaving, a cab can’t just dump you in the middle of nowhere because the cabbie decides he wants to do something else. That’s like saying the captain of on ocean liner has the right to throw passengers overboard and they can’t object. Captains of ferries and passenger ships go to prison for abandoning their passengers or not taking steps to protect them in line with their legal duty of care.
“<<< Most likely the amount of settlement will not be disclosed, by agreement. >>>
Unless the City of Chicago is a defendant. Thats taxpayers money.”
Government entities often settle for undisclosed amount, like it or not.
There is no law that forces our cities, districts, agencies, to disclose very much if they don’t want to.
And their position might be it is best that way, lest they become more costly if widely known.
Mr. Dao should get as much as he can.
Millions, if not tens of millions.
Regardless of Mr. Dao’s past, current and future flyers will benefit from
Mr. Dao’s pain and suffering.
I don’t think we are ever going to see another flyer removed by force
because of overbooking.
Carrots, not sticks will provide the incentive.
There is an interessting parallel there, to the Nader case and the use of overbooking all the way back in the 1970's. Eventually, what happened what fine print on the ticket that says something to the effect of you (any ticket holder) can be bumped due to overbooking.
Just expand that to say that you can removed from your seat at any time, depending on passenger priority, and that failure to comply with a request to vacate the aircraft can be penalized by the airline.
You keep missing the point.
Yes, United can deplane a passenger for being disruptive and that WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED A VIOLATION OF THE TICKET CONTRACT. They will not be in breach of that passenger’s ticket by doing so.
But here, I’m WILLING TO CONCEDE that United VIOLATED the terms of Dao’s ticket, for argument’s sake.
What I am telling you is Dao still has to get off the plane when ordered to do so by the airline. His only remedy is money damages for the violation of his ticket contract.
But since this is occurring aboard the aircraft and not at the gate where Airport Police may not have jurisdiction wouldn't you call the feds? And wouldn't the feds be available since this is O'Hare?
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.
United chose the police that they would call, Dao did not.
I'd have to search and find the article, but LAPD has stated that they wouldn't get involved in a seating dispute between and passenger and the airline.
Nope...sorry...wrong...
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.