Court trims passengers’ claims in case alleging hard landing injuries

Callahan v. United Airlines, Inc. (W.D. Okla. Sept. 28, 2017).  In their amended complaint, the passengers/plaintiffs alleged that the hard landing of their flight from Cancun, Mexico, to Houston caused permanent injuries to plaintiff Sylvia Callahan’s spine.  The other plaintiff, Ms. Callahan’s husband, did not allege any physical injuries from the landing.  The plaintiffs advanced … More Court trims passengers’ claims in case alleging hard landing injuries

Montreal Convention applies, and time-bars, passenger’s claims despite injury’s occurrence during domestic flight

Cattaneo v. American Airlines, Inc. (N.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2015).  The passenger/plaintiff traveled roundtrip on American’s flights between LAX and Cozumel, Mexico, via DFW, in June 2011.  In her complaint filed in November 2014, the plaintiff alleged that, during the DFW-LAX flight, a flight attendant gave her “an unlidded cup of hot water,” which spilled … More Montreal Convention applies, and time-bars, passenger’s claims despite injury’s occurrence during domestic flight

Court analyzes definition of “international carriage” under Montreal Convention

Jones v. USA 3000 Airlines (E.D. Mo. Feb. 9, 2009).  During a flight from St. Louis to Jamaica, a flight attendant allegedly pushed a service cart into the passenger’s knee, causing damage to the passenger’s “entire nervous system which had been severely shocked and deranged.”  The passenger filed a lawsuit against the airline in state … More Court analyzes definition of “international carriage” under Montreal Convention

Court considers “single operation” issue in baggage case

Gerard v. American Airlines, Inc. (Conn. Super. July 12, 2007).  After the passenger filed a lawsuit against American for lost baggage damages, the airline moved for partial summary judgment on the grounds that its damages were limited by the Montreal Convention.  The passenger argued that his damages were not limited by the Convention because the … More Court considers “single operation” issue in baggage case