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.”
It’s not their 1st rodeo, apparently this is an establish United procedure.
It’s hard to find examples of worse decision-making and customer treatment than United Airlines having a passenger dragged from an overbooked plane. But United’s shabby treatment of Geoff Fearns, including a threat to place him in handcuffs, comes close.
Fearns, 59, is president of TriPacific Capital Advisors, an Irvine investment firm that handles more than half a billion dollars in real estate holdings on behalf of public pension funds. He had to fly to Hawaii last week for a business conference.
Fearns needed to return early so he paid about $1,000 for a full-fare, first-class ticket to Los Angeles. He boarded the aircraft at Lihue Airport on the island of Kauai, took his seat and enjoyed a complimentary glass of orange juice while awaiting takeoff.
Then, as Fearns tells it, a United employee rushed onto the aircraft and informed him that he had to get off the plane.
“I asked why,” he told me. “They said the flight was overfull.”
Fearns, like the doctor at the center of that viral video from Sunday night, held his ground. He was already on the plane, already seated. He shouldn’t have to disembark.
“That’s when they told me they needed the seat for somebody more important who came at the last minute,” Fearns said. “They said they have a priority list and this other person was higher on the list than me.”
Apparently United had some mechanical troubles with the aircraft scheduled to make the flight. So the carrier swapped out that plane with a slightly smaller one with fewer first-class seats.
Suddenly it had more first-class passengers than it knew what to do with. So it turned to its “How to Screw Over Customers” handbook and determined that the one in higher standing — more miles flown, presumably — gets the seat and the other first-class passenger, even though he’s also a member of the frequent-flier program, gets the boot.
“I understand you might bump people because a flight is full,” Fearns said. “But they didn’t say anything at the gate. I was already in the seat. And now they were telling me I had no choice. They said they’d put me in cuffs if they had to.”
You couldn’t make this up if you tried.
It shouldn’t make any difference where a passenger is seated or how much he or she paid for their ticket. But you have to admire the sheer chutzpah of United putting the arm on a full-fare, first-class traveler. If there’s anybody whose business you want to safeguard and cultivate, it’s that person.
So how could United possibly make things worse? Not to worry. This is the airline that knows how to add insult to injury.
A United employee, responding to Fearns’ complaint that he shouldn’t have to miss the flight, compromised by downgrading him to economy class and placing him in the middle seat between a married couple who were in the midst of a nasty fight and refused to be seated next to each other.
“They argued the whole way back,” Fearns recalled. “Nearly six hours. It was a lot of fun.”
Back in Southern California, he consulted his lawyer and then wrote to United’s chief executive, Oscar Munoz, who commended airline workers after the passenger-dragging incident “for continuing to go above and beyond to ensure we fly right.”
Fearns requested a full refund for his flight from Kauai and asked for United to make a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice. This is how rich guys do it.
He received an email back from a United “corporate customer care specialist” apologizing that Fearns apparently had an unpleasant experience. But, no, forget about a refund.
As for that charitable donation, what are you kidding? A hard no on that.
Instead, the service rep offered to refund Fearns the difference between his first-class ticket and an economy ticket — about a week later, as if that wasn’t the first thing they should do in a situation like this — and to give him a $500 credit for a future trip on the airline.
“Despite the negative experience, we hope to have your continued support,” the rep concluded. “Your business is especially important to us and we’ll do our utmost to make your future contacts with United satisfactory in every respect.”
I reached out to United and asked if anyone cared to comment on Fearns’ adventure in corporate catastrophe. No one got back to me.
Julia Underwood, a business professor at Azusa Pacific University, said United’s actions in both the dragged-off-the-plane episode and with Fearns reflect a coldhearted mindset utterly devoid of compassion for customers.
“They’re so locked into their policies, there’s no room for empathy,” she said.
As a result, Underwood said, situations that should be manageable spiral out of control and result in unnecessarily messy PR disasters.
“What United and all companies need to do is to train and empower workers to deal with specific issues as they arise,” she said. “Don’t just follow whatever is written in your policies.”
I couldn’t agree more. United is neck-deep in trouble this week because its workers are clearly out of their depth in handling out-of-the-ordinary events. You have to think someone on the flight crew would have been able to step up, if given the trust and authority to do so by the carrier.
Fearns said three different members of the crew on his middle-seat, economy-class return to L.A. apologized for how he was treated in Hawaii. But they said they were unable to do anything.
He’s now considering a lawsuit against United — and he certainly has the resources to press his case.
I asked if he’ll ever fly United again.
Fearns could only laugh. “Are you kidding?”
I don’t believe federal law would prevent them from delaying the flight until the scheduled flight crew could arrive. I think they are using federal regulations as an excuse. Also they may be stretching their crews too thin to save money.
Lawyer here. 4-6M
From what I’ve read, they were employees of another airline. The union contrct comes into play. Plus, the passengers were already seated and their luggage checked in.
Frequent flyer or not, virtually all that’s been reported has been sympathetic to the Doctors side. Of course the CEO stepped in his mess kit.
I’ve seen situations similar to this before, one to me, and if it escalates to calling security nothing good follows. The Doctor will have to explain himself.
If Dao’s lawyer sues United without naming the City of Chicago as a co-defendant, then they’ll spend years just figuring out which venue would hear the case. The only cause of action that Dao has against United that doesn’t involve the City of Chicago relates to the breach of contract — which seems to be a Federal case, not a state matter. It’s also such a minor item that the damages he could recover for that silly cause of action wouldn’t even cover two hours of his lawyer’s time.
4.3 million.
A KEY FACT.
Dr. Dao wasn’t ALONE on this flight. His WIFE and DAUGHTER were with him.
Let’s say it was YOU and your WIFE and DAUGHTER. Your Wife doesn’t speak ENGLISH and your Daughter is a little scared of flying anyway.
The AIRLINES could have picked SOMEONE Traveling ALONE to remove from the flight.
But they PICK YOU.
Would you leave the flight, and leave your daughter and wife alone on the flight ?
What if it had been just you and your daughter ?
WHY did they pick someone to remove who was traveling with FAMILY ? IT MAKES NO SENSE.
If he had elected to get off the flight, would the airline offer him the same ‘deal’ for his wife and daughter (compensation) ?????
They had their chance and didn’t, so I’d say the answer was NO.
Yes, their biggest loss will be a precipitous drop in their passenger revenue as travelers seek out seats on their competitors aircraft.
See William D. West v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 999 F.2d 148 (9th Cir., 1993) for the "punitive damages for being bumped" angle; as well as Kalick v. Northwest Airlines Corp. (3d Cir., 2010)
There is a difference between a contractual legal right and a property legal right.
What Dao and every other ticketed passenger has is merely a contractual right to a service, to be transported to a particular destination. We don't have the legal right to possess any particular airplane or any particular seat on any airplane. We don't have the right to specific performance, which is a legal term for requiring a party to follow through and perform the contract. We merely have the right to money damages if for whatever reason the airline decides not to perform their end of the contract.
Let's say you and I get on a flight from LA to NYC. Halfway through the flight the captain gets on the intercom and announces that everyone get ready to land, we are landing in Kansas City. No reason is given.
And we land in KC. All of us passengers are hopping mad. We taxi up to a gate. The captain announces that everyone must get off the airplane.
Do you and I legally have to get off the airplane? Or like Dao, can we say look, we have tickets to NYC, we are staying in our seats until this particular plane takes us on to NYC?
Of course we have to get off. IT'S NOT OUR AIRPLANE. We can sue them for money damages for not fulfilling their side of the bargain. But we have no right to sit in our seats and make security guards drag us off of United's airplane, even if United is breaching the terms of the ticket.
UA will be (and should be) skewered in the court of public opinion, but their actual liability will focus really on what the contracted rights of transport are. I am not sure they broke any laws, as you indicate.
Dao's real case, I believe, is against the City of Chicago and their transit police.
This is what gets United off the hook from a strictly legal standpoint. The flight was effectively "overbooked" once they had to use the smaller aircraft -- and mechanical issues with aircraft are discussed at length in the terms and conditions of the ticket contracts.
I suspect this is one of the very rare cases where a first-class passenger would ever get bumped from a flight.
What if he represents himself? Wouldn’t he get the entire kit and kabootle without paying lawyer fees? He could now retire at 69 with a kool $17 million.
Right, free airfare for life, given to him the day before they declare bankruptcy.
I think the whole purpose of the Federal statute in question is to ensure that the airline has the legal obligation to inconvenience four passengers from the Chicago-Louisville flight so an entire plane full of passengers isn't delayed on the scheduled flight out of Louisville.
Yup. A really nice round number. And I bet he can get it, too.
I believe that's where the spotlight will shift once United pays up and all the jokes have been exhausted. The first thing the lawyer did was ask for a preservation order on all audio recordings and airport videos.
Notice also there was no "We can't comment on ongoing investigations" BS from the Chicago Dept of Aviation. They came right out and said the officers did not follow standard protocol, then immediately placed one on leave. They then put the other 2 officers on leave a day or 2 later. It's looking ominous for them.
Same here. And I bet he gets it
I wish this was posted at the top of every thread on this subject. The delusion I've seen among a lot of people here on this point is comical.
You haven't truly weighed in on a "United beats up Dr. Dao" thread until you've had arguments with at least five people who insist the passenger had a lease agreement for his seat. LOL.
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.