Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

United Sued for WTC Hijacking Attack
Reuters ^ | 12-20-01

Posted on 12/20/2001 9:02:10 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

Edited on 04/13/2004 3:29:07 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The widow of a New Hampshire man who was a passenger on the United Air Lines flight that slammed into the World Trade Center filed on Thursday what is believed to be the first suit against an airline stemming from the Sept. 11 attacks.


(Excerpt) Read more at bayarea.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
To: ambrose
The lawyer is the gun.

True, but.....Guns don't sit around trying to figure out how to get someone to pick them up and fire them.

41 posted on 12/20/2001 10:12:26 AM PST by is_is
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
....wonder how much money it will take to bring her husband back....
42 posted on 12/20/2001 10:25:00 AM PST by rogercolleridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak
Sorry, but the fact the standard practice was different prior to 911, does not, in law, mean that it was not a negligent practice.

The airlines and the FAA had plenty of warning about cockpit intrusions prior to 911. They knew, or ought to have known the risks. They knowingly chose to leave the cockpits unsecured, the flight crews unprotected, and to routinely disarm all passengers who are otherwise legally entitled to carry concealed weapons for self defence. In doing so, they took upon themselves a duty to ensure that their passengers were kept reasonably safe from harm. In my view they failed miserably in carrying out that duty.

Let me add that this lawsuit will very likely be successful unless the Government intervenes to disallow all such lawsuits in an effort to protect the airlines from the foreseeable consequences of their own negligence. Which is also likely, given the enormous damages suffered across the nation that could properly be claimed against the airlines.

43 posted on 12/20/2001 10:26:13 AM PST by Melinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: US admirer
Is it possible that you might have no idea what you're talking about?
44 posted on 12/20/2001 10:28:40 AM PST by Melinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Iron Eagle
Sorry for the delay, I was off-line for a while. I hope, my litigation proponent friend, that my comments have not made you too angry or upset (tried not to use any big words there given your concern over my choice of terminology)? How about you tell us why the million dollar+ award for the paint scratch on the BMW in Alabama was worthy of such an award. On the hand, please don't bother, I’d rather not hear some lame rationalization that only a “litigation” expert like you would offer.

While I have not tried cases, I have served as an expert witness for over 15 years in two countries. I have done so pro bono in over 30 cases- and as yet have never received a single cent except for expenses. I did this because I was disgusted at the majority of filings that I have been privy to and recognized that my input might well be crucial. Oh and by the way, in view of your prior wittiness and in anticipation of your next attempt at such (i.e. you get what you pay for, etc…), the side for which I provided testimony was never defeated in court.

The tort system in the US is corrupt and could only have been perpetuated by virtue of control of the political system, by people like yourself.

Unfortunately it is people like you that have created this self-serving mess, a system that virtually everyone expect plaintiff lawyers and their clients, recognize as broken. In other words Iron E, it is self-evident to virtually all, that the system reeks and is made even more putrid by the protestations of people like you.

As for a remedy, this country would be far better off with no fault provisions for much of what is currently litigated. Also, caps for pain and suffering are logical and desirable. Canada, years ago, realized this and brought a measure of sanity to this situation, when the supreme court set a maximum dollar amount for anyone’s pain and suffering and indexed it to inflation.

BTW, didn’t even use my thesaurus for this post.

45 posted on 12/20/2001 10:31:29 AM PST by US admirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: is_is
True, but.....Guns don't sit around trying to figure out how to get someone to pick them up and fire them.

That's not what Chuckie Schumer says.

46 posted on 12/20/2001 10:32:02 AM PST by ambrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
SHEESH, who should I sue because the terrorist attack cost New York billions in dircet costs and billions in indirect economic losses. Therefore, I could have lost income and my taxes could rise, not to mention the mental anquish and suffering. WHO DO I SUE ?
47 posted on 12/20/2001 10:33:22 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
We shouldn't rely on Government to dictate every safety measure, but you can bet that the airlines will argue very strenuously that we should. If they can get pass the buck on that one to the Government, the Plaintiff in this action will lose courtesy of the exclusions of liability which the Government reserves unto itself.
48 posted on 12/20/2001 10:33:27 AM PST by Melinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Melinator
And what might your qualifications be?
49 posted on 12/20/2001 10:33:44 AM PST by US admirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator

To: GingisK
The airlines are ultimately responsible for the safety of thier passengers.

Insurance doesn't insure against "an act of God or war". The airlines are not responsible in this case. They should sue OBL and the Al Quada network.

51 posted on 12/20/2001 10:36:04 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Reading about this suit is causing me pain and suffering. I think I'm going to have to sue Mrs. Mariani, her husband's estate, and their lawyers.
52 posted on 12/20/2001 10:36:59 AM PST by RichInOC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
...the first action against an airline seeking to hold it liable for the hijacking...

Why not sue the hijackers?

53 posted on 12/20/2001 10:38:48 AM PST by Jack Barbara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladtx
Well, here we go. The terroists couldn't run the airlines out of business, but I'll bet the lawyers will sure give it a try. 2 posted on 12/20/01 10:04 AM Pacific by ladtx [

Yeah, how are those Islamic muslim Arabs going to get over here to the Great Satan USA to live and terrorize, after all the airlines are out of business??! By boat?! Boy are they retarted!!

54 posted on 12/20/2001 10:39:02 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I could be wrong but I think the legislation passed
by congress to bail out the airlines after 9/11 also
limited their liablity.
55 posted on 12/20/2001 10:39:32 AM PST by evaporation-plus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
The airlines dont hire the airport security personnel. Period. The airports, port authorities, local governments and the like are responsible for it.

The airlines do NOT hire screeners, etc. The airlines are NOT responsible for airport security. THAT is an absurd, ridiculous statement made by someone who doesnt understand the industry (i.e. knee jerk).

56 posted on 12/20/2001 10:41:43 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
What an idiotic statement.

Fine, then do this:

Move to an apartment complex and you being a tennant are now responsible for the safety and security of the entire complex.

Stop making stupid statements when you obviously don't know anything about the industry.

57 posted on 12/20/2001 10:44:08 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #58 Removed by Moderator

To: Oldeconomybuyer
You know what this lawsuit tells me?

The wrong family member died in the crash. What idiots.

59 posted on 12/20/2001 10:47:47 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Melinator
...If they can get pass the buck on that one to the Government...

Ah yes, the fix was in when the laws and guidelines were written, weren't they? Even if the current plantiff wins or loses, there won't ever be any true airport security in the US. We can count on 'Mexican Federale'-like shakedowns and continued security breaches.

60 posted on 12/20/2001 10:50:31 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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