FLIGHT DELAYS: THE AIRLINE PASSENGER'S RIGHTS & REMEDIES

FLIGHT DELAYS: THE AIRLINE PASSENGER'S RIGHTS & REMEDIES
Originally Published In The International Travel Law Journal1. This Article May Not Be Reproduced Without The Permission Of Thomas A. Dickerson. UPDATED JULY 1, 2000 REVISION NUMBER 1 By Judge Thomas A. Dickerson2 While domestic airline " have a good product that is selling well " and this year the airline industry " will record more than 600 million domestic passenger ` enplanements "3 the quality and timeliness of domestic air transportation has decreased dramatically in recent years. " Virtually every independent measure of customer satisfaction has declined...The unfortunate truth is that flying on an airplane today...is as unpleasant for many passengers as it has ever been. "4. Between 1998 and 1999 passenger complaints to the U.S. Department of Transportation rose from 9,608 to a staggering 20,4955. The largest number of complaints made to the DOT through its e-mail address at airconsumer@ost.dot.gov involves flight delays and cancellations. Regarding cancellations " Last month 8,590 flights were canceled out of 307,116 scheduled. A year ago it was 6,487 out of 299,132...weather, air traffic, mechanical difficulties, rules governing crew hours and hundreds of other causes, including human error, can upset schedules "6 And regarding flight delays " Only about three-quarters of planes arrive within 15 minutes of the scheduled time, and in bad months, about one flight in 40 is canceled altogether "7 What are your rights and remedies when your flight, domestic or international, is delayed or canceled? Types Of Flight Delays A flight delay is any change from the promised time and date of departure or arrival. Flight delays include, of course, (1) Cancellations [ Obuzor v. Sabena Belgian World Airlines8 ( canceled flight due to fog causes a 5 day delay in arrival in Lagos, Nigeria ); Pakistan Arts v. Pakistan International Airlines9( 2 day delay in Karachi, Pakistan forces entertainers to cancel concert in New York City ); In Re Arrow Air, Inc10. ( 8,000 consumers stranded when tour operator and air carrier default; settlement of claims ); ] as well as flight delays caused by (2) Mechanical malfunctions [ see Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic11 ( flight diverted because of mechanical malfunction; passengers involuntarily held on tarmac for one hour and fifteen minutes and later confined to transit lounge for one hour and ten minutes without access to telephones ); Arkin v. Trans International Airlines12 ( tire blow out during takeoff ); Burke v. Air France13 ( engine trouble during flight; mental anguish damages recoverable ); In re Eastern Airlines, Inc. Engine Failure14 ( all three jet engines fail during flight; one engine restarted ); (3) Acts of God [ De Vera v. Japan Airlines15 ( flight delay caused by typhoon and volcanic eruption which forced closing of Manila airport ); Johnson v. Northwest Orient Airlines16 ( flight canceled because of bad weather ); Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp.17 ( charter tour delayed 2 ½ days because of snowstorm ) ]; (4) Schedule Changes [( Robinson v. American Airlines18 ( passenger misses flight because airline advances departure time by ten minutes ); Prechtl v. Travel House of Garden City19 ( flight from Seattle to Hawaii canceled by airline which never informed travel agent who relied upon information in computer reservations system; passengers waited sleepless in Seattle for two days for flight to Hawaii )]; (5) Hijackings and bombings [ Shah v. Pan American World Services, Inc.20 ( hijacking in Karachi, Pakistan ); In re Air Disaster at Lockerbie21 ( bomb explodes on aircraft over Scotland ); In re Flight Explosion on TQA Aircraft22 ( bomb explodes on aircraft )]; (6) Noxious body odors [ Mohideen v. American Airlines, Inc.23 ( passenger and children removed from aircraft because of noxious body odors )]; (7) False imprisonment [ Bayne v. Adventure Tours USA24 ( passenger detained and baggage searched; claims of false imprisonment ); Curley v. American Airlines, Inc.25 ( passenger claims false imprisonment after being detained by authorities who were informed that passenger was smoking marihuana in lavatory ); Rombom v. United Air Lines26( rude and unprofessional conduct by stewards who spitefully had passenger falsely arrested )]; (8) Wrongful detention [ Uwagbai v. Alitalia Airlines27 ( passenger detained in airport lounge for 3 days because of forged travel documents ); Singh v. Tarom Romanian Air Transport28( passenger removed from aircraft and detained for 6 days ); Donkor v. British Airways, Corp.29 ( passenger detained and deported from England ); Macintosh v. Interface Group30 ( passenger removed from aircraft, arrested, jailed and charged with breach of the peace )]; (9) Violation of Air Carrier's Access Act [ Newman v. American Airlines, Inc.31 ( blind passenger with a heart condition claims violation of Air Carrier Access Act ( ACAA ) after airline refused transportation in the absence of a medical certificate indicating she could safely fly ); Brandt v. American Airlines32 ( passenger's ACAA claim for airline's failure to offer food service dismissed ); Rivera v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.33 ( failure to offer wheelchair assistance )]; (10) Wrongful refusal to board [ Chukwu v. British Airways34 ( airline refuses to board passenger's brother ); Glavey v. Aer Lingus35 ( passenger not allowed to board unless she wrote a written apology to airline for filing a lost baggage claim 10 days earlier )]; (11) Failure to confirm or reconfirm reservations [ Lathigra v. British Airways36 ( negligent failure to reconfirm flight strands passenger in Nairobi ); El-Menshawy v. Egypt Air37 ( failure to confirm flight from Cairo ); Burnap v. Tribeca Travel38 ( travel agent fails to confirm reservations and note changes ) ]; (12) Discrimination [ Mohideen v. American Airlines, Inc.39 ( passenger and children removed from aircraft because of noxious body odor claim religious discrimination ); Owolabi v. Air France40 ( blind passenger in wheelchair denied assistance and left unattended in airport for seven hours during which time she urinated on herself; claims discrimination based upon race, age and disabilities ); Quinn v. National Railroad Passenger Corp41 ( African-American passengers ejected from train; discrimination based on race and violating ejectment rules ); Pearson v. Lake Forest Country Day School42 ( emotional distress and defamation action arising from failure to seat 13 year old boy )]; (13) Airline overbooking [ Minhas v. Biman Bangladesh Airlines43 ( passenger delayed 45 days after being overbooked in New Delhi, India ); Lopez v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.44 ( compensatory damages awarded to passenger overbooked on domestic flight ); Guerrero v. American Airlines, Inc.45 ( airline not liable for breach of contract for overbooked flight )], (14) Wrongful ejection [ Hermano v. United Airlines46 ( passenger suspected of having a gun is removed from aircraft ); Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.47 ( dispute over storage of carry-on baggage in overhead bin leads to removal of passenger from aircraft ); Schaeffer v. Cavallero48( passenger removed from flight after vociferously demanding a receipt for a piece of carry-on baggage ); Rombom v. United Air Lines, Inc.49 ( disruptive passenger removed from aircraft )]; (15) Failure to assist disabled passenger [ Owolabi v. Air France50 ( blind passenger in wheelchair denied assistance and left unattended in airport for seven hours during which time she urinated on herself); Shupe v. American Airlines51 ( failure to meet and assist passenger making connecting flight )]; (16) Misinformation [ Lewis v. Continental Airlines, Inc.52 ( passenger missed connection after being misinformed about flight departure time ); Siben v. American Airlines, Inc.53 ( airline misrepresented location and arrival time of lost baggage ); Carro v. Parente World Travel Center54 ( travel agent failed to include tickets as part of package tour )]; (17) Civil disorder [ Jamil v. Kuwait Corp.55 ( four day flight delay because of coup in Pakistan )]; (18) Shortage of fuel [ Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited56 ( 25 hour flight delay caused by mechanical malfunctions and shortage of fuel )]; (19) Misplaced tickets [ Ragonese v. Rosenfeld57 ( airline ticket agent fails to locate ticket at airport; passenger forced to buy a second ticket at a higher price )]; (20) Collapsing ticket counters [ Romero v. American Airlines, Inc.58 ( passenger delayed and injured when airport check-in counter sign collapsed on her )]; and (21) Altered tickets [ Peralta v. Continental Airlines, Inc.59 ( passenger removed from aircraft because of altered ticket lost business deal in Costa Rica and claims lost profits of $30,000 )]. Rights & Remedies The passenger's rights and remedies for a cancellation or a flight delay will depend upon several factors. Was the flight international or domestic? If it was international then the Warsaw Convention or its progeny may apply. If not then the law of the country having the greatest contacts to the incident may apply [ Barkanic v. General Administration of Civil Aviation60 ( air disaster; China not a signatory to Warsaw Convention; Chinese law applied on issue of recoverable damages; $20,000 maximum allowable ); Glavey v. Aer Lingus61 ( passenger refused boarding; statute of limitations for asserting claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress determined by law of New York and not that of Ireland ); Macintosh v. Interface Group62 ( unruly passenger removed from aircraft; Connecticut law applies to claims )]. If the flight was domestic then the passenger's rights and remedies will depend upon the application of the common law as modified or preempted by the regulations of the DOT. Such regulations give domestic airline passengers greater or lesser rights than would otherwise be available at common law. These regulations raise the following additional issues. (1) If the flight was regularly scheduled domestic air transportation then the passenger ticket may contain disclaimers which limit the airline's liability for flight delays. Under what circumstances are these disclaimers enforceable? (2) Was the flight part of a Public Charter Tour? (3) Was the delay caused by airline overbooking or discrimination? (4) Was the passenger detained because he was unruly or otherwise a threat to the safety and well being of the other passengers on the aircraft? International Flight Delays If the delayed flight was international, i.e., between signatories to the Warsaw Convention, then the obligations of the air carrier are set forth in Article 19 of the Warsaw Convention [ " The carrier shall be liable for damage occasioned by delay in the transportation by air of passengers, baggage, or goods "63 ]. To establish liability the passenger must show that (1) the air carrier accepted the passenger on the flight [ Malik v. Gulf Air64 ( international bumping causes delay; Article 19 of the Warsaw Convention applies )], (2) the delay was material [ Tasar v. Pakistan International Airlines65 ] and (3) the delay caused the injury being alleged [ Jamil v. Kuwait Airways Corp.66 ( four day delay; damages from loss of business opportunity not foreseeable )]. International Flight Delay Damages The Warsaw Convention permits the recovery of (1) compensatory damages which are reasonable and foreseeable, (2) damages for inconvenience but (3) bars the recovery of punitive damages [ Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic Airways67 ( 25 hour flight delay; damages for inconvenience are recoverable ); Harplani v. Air-India68 ( 6 day delay in India; compensatory but not punitive damages are recoverable ); Pakistan Arts v. Pakistan International Airlines69 ( 2 day delay in Pakistan causes cancellation of concert in New York City; all contemplated and foreseeable damages recoverable ); Saiyed v. Transmediterranean Airways70 ( delayed shipment of goods; all consequential damages recoverable up to limits provided in the Warsaw Convention ); Kupferman v. Pakistan International Airlines71 ( baggage delayed 15 days during tour of South America; passengers were entitled to " fair and just compensation for physical discomfort, inconvenience, humiliation, embarrassment and loss of a refreshing memorable vacation " )]. All Necessary Measures However, the air carrier may be able to escape liability if it can show that it took " all necessary measures to avoid the damage or...it was impossible ...to take such measures72 "[ Duff v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.73 ( flight delay; all necessary measures taken ); Peralta v Continental Airlines, Inc74 ( passenger removed from aircraft because ticket appeared altered; airline took all necessary measures to get passenger to Costa Rica after establishing that ticket was valid ); Obuzor v. Sabena Belgian World Airlines75)( 5 day flight delay; airline took all necessary measures to avoid delay )]. Wilful Misconduct The Warsaw Convention provides in Article 25 that the air carrier may not " exclude or limit " its liability if the delay is caused by its wilful misconduct. Proving wilful misconduct is difficult but it has been done in cases involving flight delays [ Tasar v. Pakistan International Airlines76 ( delay in the delivery of a casket for a funeral; wilful misconduct proven )], baggage loss or delay in delivery [ Bank of Nova Scotia v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.77 ( failure to follow internal procedures regarding loss of gold is wilful misconduct ); Cohen v. Varig Airlines, Inc.78( failure to deliver baggage during extended tour of South America is wilful misconduct ); Kupferman v. Pakistan International Airlines79( wilful misconduct in the handling of baggage )] and physical injuries and death [ Shah v. Pan American World Services, Inc80 ( hijacking in Karachi, Pakistan; fraudulent misrepresentation of adequacy of security system is wilful misconduct ); In re Air Disaster at Lockerbie81 ( bomb explodes on aircraft; failure to comply with FAA regulations in screening baggage is wilful misconduct )]. Domestic Flight Delays Air transportation is sold to the general public with the promise that it will depart and arrive at specific times on specific dates. Applying the common law some courts have held that a failure to deliver air transportation " on time " is a breach of contract [ Farmilant v. Singapore Airlines, Ltd.82 ( flight delay was a " tortious breach of contract " )]. The breach must be material and may be 2 hours and 16 minutes [ Liechtung v. Tower Air, Inc.83 ( flight misrepresented as " non-stop " stops over in Paris causing a delay in arriving in Tel Aviv ); 3 hours [ Sporn v. Metro International84 ( 3 hour delay when airline loans aircraft to film company for background to a movie )], 8 ½ hours [ Koczara v. Wayne County85 ( snowstorm at airport results in the stranding of hundreds of passengers on aircraft queued on taxiways for up to 8 ½ hours without food service and toilets overflowing )]; 10 hours[ Freedman v. Northwest Airlines Inc.86 ( exculpatory clause in tariff not enforced in breach of contract claim arising from a 10 hour flight delay ) ]; 2 days [ Prechtl v. Travel House of Garden City87 ( flight from Seattle to Hawaii canceled by airline which never informed travel agent who relied upon information in computer reservations system; passengers waited sleepless in Seattle for two days for flight to Hawaii )] and 2 ½ days [( Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp.88 ( charter tour participants stranded for 2 ½ days at airport during snowstorm )]. Such a breach may also constitute negligence [ Reservation Desk v. A.L.I.A.89 ( air carrier liable in negligence for failure to advise travel agency that reservations could not be confirmed ); Sporn v. Metro International Airways90 ( 3 hour flight delay may be the result of negligence ] and fraud [ Jawal v. British Airways91 ( passenger detained because of stolen tickets )]. Some Courts, however, have refused to find a breach of the contract of carriage stating that timetables do not constitute a " warranty of punctuality " [ Chendrimada v. Air-India92 ( passengers forced to stay on aircraft for 11 ½ hours; flight schedules are not guarantees ); Padua v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.93 ( ticket clause stating that timetables not guaranteed enforced; no liability for flight delay and missed connection ); Robinson v. American Airlines94 ]. The contract of carriage applies to point-to-point air transportation. There is no continuing common law contractual duty to the passenger once he or she disembarks the aircraft [ Martinez v. American Airlines95 ( passenger suffered medical difficulties after arrival at initial destination; airline has no obligation to assist him or transport him to his final destination after becoming ill )]. Disclaimers In Passenger Tickets Domestic air carriers are permitted by the DOT to file tariffs96 limiting their liability and damages for flight delays and other travel problems and to incorporate those terms by reference in the passenger ticket [ Wolst v. American Airlines, Inc.97, ( discussion of the incorporation by reference system )]. Although the passenger may never be aware of such disclaimers some Courts have enforced them [ Padua v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.98 ( ticket clause stating that timetables not guaranteed enforced; no liability for flight delay and missed connection ); Macintosh v. Interface Group99 ( unruly passenger removed from aircraft; air carrier tariff " Carrier will refuse to carry, cancel the reserved space of, or remove en route any passenger (a) When such action is necessary for reasons of safety " enforced ); Robinson v. American Airlines100 ( passenger missed flight because airline advanced departure time by ten minutes; ticket disclaimer " Carrier shall not be liable for failing to operate any flight according to schedule " enforced ); Sethi v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines101 ( passenger denied boarding because of improper visas; tariff disclaiming liability for misinformation enforced ); Madia v. Austin Travel Agency102 ( passengers denied entry because of improper visas; tariffs absolving airline of liability enforced )] while others have not [ Coughlin v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.103 ( violation of tariff voids liability limit ); Freedman v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.104 ( exculpatory clause in ticket not enforced in breach of contract claim arising from 10 hour flight delay ); Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp.105 ( 2 ½ day flight delay; disclaimer which strikes at heart of the bargain unenforceable ); Larken v. Tourlite International, Inc.106 ( tour operator liable for failing to deliver return air transportation; disclaimers unenforceable ) ]. Privity Of Contract Defense An air carrier hired by a tour operator may claim that the passenger has no standing to assert a flight delay claim [ Carro v. Parente World Travel Center 107( travel agent failed to deliver air tickets; summary judgment for air carrier and tour operator; lack of privity of contract )]. It has been held, however, that passengers are third party beneficiaries of the contracts between air carriers and tour operators and have standing to assert a cause of action against the air carrier [ Neal v. Republic Airlines108; Harris v. Waikane Corp.109; Agosto v. Leisure World Travel, Inc.110 ( tour operator of Rose Bowl package tours fails to deliver rental cars; participants third party beneficiaries of contract between tour operator and rental car company )]. Act Of God Defense The airline may claim that it was prevented from delivering timely air transportation because of an Act of God [ The Majestic111 ( " the act of God is limited...to causes in which no man has any agency whatever; because it was never intended to arise " )] such as a snowstorm [ Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp112. ( charter tour passengers stuck at airport for 2 ½ days during snowstorm )], a typhoon or volcanic eruption [ De Vera v. Japan Airlines113 ( Manila Airport closed because of volcano and typhoon ) ] or a revolution or civil disorder [ Jamil v. Kuwait Corp114. ( flight delayed 4 days due to coup in Pakistan )]. To prevail, however, the air carrier must establish a causal connection between the Act Of God and its failure to deliver timely air transportation. In addition, the air carrier must prove that it acted reasonably to reinstitute the flight once the snowstorm or unexpected event ceased and the airport completed clean-up operations [ Bernstein v. Cunard Line, Ltd.115 ]. Mechanical Malfunction Defense The air carrier may assert that the delay was caused by a mechanical malfunction. Such a defense is unlikely to be accepted by the Courts unless the air carrier can prove that the malfunction was truly unforeseeable [ Feuer v. Value Vacations, Inc.116 ( 48 hour delay due to engine malfunction; disclaimer void )]. Public Charter Tours If the air transportation is part of a Public Charter Tour then the duties of both the air carrier and tour operator are governed by DOT regulations [ 14 Code of Federal Regulations Sections 207, 208 & 380 ]. The air carrier is, for example, obligated to return passengers stranded abroad after a tour operator becomes insolvent117. Some Courts have held the Public Charter Tour Operator liable for the flight delays caused by a cooperating charter air carrier and other travel suppliers [ Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp.118 ( tour operator strictly liable as principal for defaults of hotels and air carriers in failing to deliver travel services )]. Some Courts, however, have enforced disclaimers in the tour participant contract absolving tour operators for flight delays [ Accomando v. Trans National Travel119 ( tour operator not liable for 36 hour flight delay; disclaimer enforced )]. Both Public Charter Tour Operators and cooperating air carriers are required to place consumer deposits into escrow accounts [ Neilan v. Value Vacations, Inc.120 ( 8,000 passengers stranded; escrow bank liable for failing to properly handle escrowed monies )] and/or to have surety bonds to protect consumer deposits [ Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp.121 ( surety bonds cover all types of claims against tour operator )]. Airline Overbooking On occasion passengers with confirmed reservations may be " bumped " because the airline has oversold the flight. Domestic air carriers are permitted to deliberately breach the contract of carriage on the theory that it is more efficient to oversell a flight than to fly an aircraft half-empty. If they overbook a specific flight the air carrier must comply with DOT " Part 250- Oversales "122 regulations which require an " auction " procedure whereby " bumped " passengers may obtain a seat if seated passengers can be induced to give up their position. Otherwise the air carrier must compensate the bumped passenger " at the rate of 200 percent of the sum of the values of the passenger's remaining flight coupons up to the passenger's next stopover, or if none, to the passenger's final destination, with a maximum of $400 "123. If the bumped passenger does not wish to accept the denied boarding compensation then he or she may sue at common law for breach of contract or negligence. While bumped passengers may not sue for fraud and punitive damages [ West v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.124 ( " Federal regulations contemplate overbooking as an acceptable practice so long as passengers received compensation " )] they may sue for compensatory damages alleging a breach of the contract of carriage [ Semrod v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion125 ( overbooking; beach of contract damages include $3000 for loss of one vacation day; food allowance of $300 and a room allowance of $250 per day ); Lopez v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.126 ( actual compensatory damages awarded to passenger bumped from flight due to overbooking )]. Unruly Passengers Passengers may be removed from airplanes because their actions may endanger the safety of the other passengers. Such grounds may serve as a defense in a passenger's action seeking damages for flight delays [ Schaeffer v. Cavallero127 ( passenger removed from aircraft after dispute over carry-on luggage ); Macintosh v. Interface Group128 ( unruly passenger removed from aircraft; air carrier tariff allowing removal for safety of passengers enforced ); Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.129 ( passenger removed from aircraft after threatening another passenger over the use of overhead bin ) ]. Damages For Flight Delays Damages arising from a canceled flight may consist of the cost of alternate air transportation which is more expensive than the original flight[ McMurray v. Capital International Airways, Inc.130 ]. Consequential damages for cancellations and fight delays that are reasonably foreseeable are recoverable [ Reservation Desk v. ALIA131 ( air carrier liable for all consequential damages for failure to deliver air transportation ); Smith v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc132. ( delay due to bad weather; air carrier liable for consequential damages )] including $3,000 for the loss of one vacation day [ Semrod v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion133 ], $2,500 for the loss of " a refreshing memorable vacation " [ Vick v. National Airlines, Inc.134, ] and $240 for " waiting time " [ Das v. Royal Jordanian Airlines135 ][ See also the cases discussed above in International Flight Delay Damages ]. Travel Class Actions Class actions allow many similar claims to be aggregated into one lawsuit for discovery, trial and/or settlement136. Passengers victimized by the same canceled flight [ Neilan v. Value Vacations137 ( 2,000 stranded passengers )] or delayed flight have been certified as a class and allowed to assert class wide claims for breach of contract, negligence and fraud [ Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp138.( charter passengers delayed 2 ½ days because of snowstorm )]. Class actions arising from a failure to deliver a " non-stop " flight have also been certified [ Liechtung v. Tower Air, Inc.139 ( unexpected stop over caused a delay of 2 hours and 16 minutes ) and the standing passengers for 8 ½ hours in aircraft on runaways during a snowstorm in Michigan [ Koczara v. Wayne County140]. FOOTNOTES 1 . Dickerson, Flight Delays: Rights, Remedies, Damages & Class Actions, International Travel Law Journal, Issue Two, Spring, 2000.2 . Thomas A. Dickerson is a Westchester County Court Judge with a Web Page at http://members.aol.com/judgetad/index.html. Judge Dickerson is the author of Travel Law, Law Journal Press, New York, 1981-2000, see http://members.aol.com/travellaw/index.html, Class Actions: The Law of 50 States, Law Journal Press, New York, 1988-2000, see http://members.aol.com/class50/index.html, and over 170 articles and papers on consumer law, travel law and class actions, see http://courts.state.ny.us/tandv/legal.html .3 . Wald, Getting There: A Reality Check, N.Y. Times, Sunday Travel Section, June 25, 2000, p. 12.4 . Leonhardt, Promises In The Sky, N.Y. Times, Sunday Travel Section, June 25, 2000, p. 13.5 . Wade, Practical Traveler, A Flier's Guide To Complaining, N.Y. Times Sunday Travel Section, March 12, 2000, p. 4.6 . Wade, Practical Traveler, Coping With Canceled Flights, N.Y. Times Travel Section, June 25, 2000, p. 4.7 . Wald, Getting There: A Reality Check, N.Y. Times, Sunday Travel Section, June 25, 2000, p. 16.8 . Obuzor v. Sabena Belgian World Airlines, 1999 WL 223162 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).9 . Pakistan Arts v. Pakistan International Airlines, 232 A.D. 2d 29, 660 N.Y.S. 2d 741 ( 1997 ).10 . In Re Arrow Air, Inc., 85 Bankr. 886 ( Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1988 ).11 . Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic Limited, 59 F. Supp. 2d 986 ( N.D. Cal. 1998 ).12 . Arkin v. Trans International Airlines, 20 CCH Aviation Cases 17,835 ( 2d Cir. 1987 ).13 . Burke v. Air France, 21 CCH Aviation Cases 18,170 ( D.P.R. 1988 ).14 . In re Eastern Airlines, Inc. Engine Failure in Miami International Airport on May 5, 1983, 629 F. Supp. 307 ( S.D. Fla. 1986 ).15 . DeVera v. Japan Airlines, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,317 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ).16 . Johnson v. Northwest Orient Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,220 ( Mont. Sup. 1982 ).17 . Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., 73 A.D. 2d 521, 422 N.Y.S. 2d 407 ( 1979 ).18 . Robinson v. American Airlines, New York Law Journal, June 19, 1995, p. 33, col. 5 ( White Plains City Ct. 1995 ).19 . Prechtl v. Travel House of Garden City, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,182 ( N.Y. Civ. 1980 ), mod'd 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,183 ( N.Y. App. Term. 1981 ).20 . Shah v. Pan American World Services, Inc., 148 F. 3d 84 ( 2d Cir. 1998 ).21 . In re Air Disaster at Lockerbie, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,252 ( 2d Cir. 1994 ).22 . In re Flight Explosion on TQA Aircraft, 23 CCH Aviation Cases 18,048 ( E.D.N.Y. 1991 ).23 . Mohideen v. American Airlines, Inc., 27 CCH Aviation Cases 17,242 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).24 . Bayne v. Adventure Tours USA, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,004 ( N.D. Tex. 1994 ).25 . Curley v. AMR Corp., 846 F. Supp. 280 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ), aff'd 153 F. 3d 5 ( 2d Cir. 1997 ).26 . Rombom v. United Air Lines, 867 F. Supp. 214 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ).27 . Uwagbai v. Alitalia Airlines, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 17,811 ( D. Mass. 1994 ).28 . Singh v. Tarom Romanian Air Transport, 88 F. Supp. 2d 62 ( E.D.N.Y. 2000 ).29 . Donkor v. British Airways, Corp., 62 F. Supp. 2d 963 ( E.D.N.Y. 1999 ).30 . Macintosh v. Interface Group, 1999 Mass. Super. LEXIS 3 ( Mass. Super. 1999 ).31 . Newman v. American Airlines, Inc., 1999 WL 261560 ( 9th Cir. 1999 ).32 . Brandt v. American Airlines, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3164 ( N.D. Cal. 2000 ).33 . Rivera v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 26 CCH Aviation Cases 15,129 ( E.D. Pa. 1997 ).34 . Chukwu v. British Airways, 1995 WL 379405 ( D. Mass. 1995 ).35 . Glavey v. Aer Lingus, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10498 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).36 . Lathigra v. British Airways, 41 F. 3d 535 ( 9th Cir. 1994 ).37 . El-Menshawy v. Egypt Air, 276 N.J. Super. 121, 647 A. 2d 49 ( 1994 ).38 . Burnap v. Tribeca Travel, 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,321 ( N.Y. Civ. 1988 ).39 . Mohideen v. American Airlines, Inc., 27 CCH Aviation Cases 17,242 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).40 . Owolabi v. Air France, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3208 ( S.D.N.Y. 2000 ).41 . Quinn v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12907 ( N.D. Ill. 1999 ).42 . Pearson v. Lake Forest Country Day School, 262 Ill. App. 3d 228, 199 Ill. Dec. 324, 633 N.E. 2d 1315 ( 1994 ).43 . Minhas v. Biman Bangladesh Airlines, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9849 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).44 . Lopez v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 677 F. Supp. 181 ( S.D.N.Y. 1988 ).45 . Guerrero v. American Airlines, Inc., 26 CCH Aviation Cases 15,624 ( S.D.N.Y. 1998 ).46 . Hermano v. United Airlines, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19808 ( N.D. Cal. 1999 ).47 . Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1026 ( N.D. Ill. 1999 ).48 . Schaeffer v. Cavallero, 54 F. Supp. 2d 350 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).49 . Rombom v. United Air Lines, Inc., 867 F. Supp. 214 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ).50 . Owolabi v. Air France, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3208 ( S.D.N.Y. 2000 ).51 . Shupe v. American Airlines, Inc., 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,391 ( Tex. App. 1995 ).52 . Lewis v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 40 F. Supp. 2d 406 ( S.D. Tex. 1999 ).53 . Siben v. American Airlines, Inc., 913 F. Supp. 271 ( S.D.N.Y. 1996 ).54 . Carro v. Parente World Travel Center, 23 CCH Aviation Cases 18,345 ( N.D. Ohio 1991 ).55 . Jamil v. Kuwait Airways Corp., 772 F. Supp. 482 ( D.D.C. ).56 . Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited, 59 F. Supp. 2d 986 ( N.D. Cal. 1998 ).57 . Ragonese v. Rosenfeld, 318 N.J. Super. 63, 722 A. 2d 991 ( 1998 ).58 . Romero v. American Airlines, Inc., 194 F. 3d 288 ( 1st Cir. 1999 ).59 . Peralta v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 1999 WL 193393 ( N.D. Cal. 1999 ).60 60. Barkanic v. General Administration of Civil Aviation, 923 F. 2d 957 ( 2d Cir. 1991 ).61 . Glavey v. Aer Lingus, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10498 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ).62 . Macintosh v. Interface Group, 1999 Mass. Super. LEXIS 3 ( Mass. Super. 1999 ).63 . Warsaw Convention, Article 19.64 . Malik v. Gulf Air, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 17,736 ( S.D.N.Y. 1993 ). See also: Sixth Circuit: Saiyed v. Trans Mediterranean Airways, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 17,835 ( W.D. Mich. 1981 ). Seventh Circuit: Harpalani v. Air India, Inc., 19 CCH Aviation Cases 17,887 ( N.D. Ill. 1985 ). State Courts: New York: Ressler v. Korean Airlines, Inc., New York Law Journal, August 19, 1994, p. 22, col. 5 ( N.Y. Sup. 1994 ).65 . Tasar v. Pakistan International Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 18,618 ( S.D. Tex. 1982 ). See also: Seventh Circuit: Wolgel v. Mexicana Airlines, 20 CCH Aviation Cases 18,097 ( 7th Cir. 1987 ).66 . Jamil v. Kuwait Airways Corp., 773 F. Supp. 482 ( D.C.D.C. 1991 ).67 . Daniel v. Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited, 59 F. Supp. 2d 986 ( N.D. Cal. 1998 ).68 . Harplani v. Air India, Inc., 634 F. Supp. 797, 798-799 ( N.D. Ill. 1986 ).69 . Pakistan Arts v. Pakistan International Airlines Corp., 232 A.D. 2d 29, 660 N.Y.S. 2d 741 ( 1997 ).70 . Saiyed v. Transmediterranean Airways, 509 F. Supp. 1167 ( W.D. Mich. 1981 ).71 . Kupferman v. Pakistan International Airlines, 108 Misc. 2d 485, 438 N.Y.S. 2d 189 ( 1981 ).72 . Warsaw Convention, Article 20(1).73 . Duff v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,795 ( Ill. App. 1988 ). See also: New York: Cenci v. Mall Airways, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,812 ( N.Y. Sup. 1988 ); McMurray v. Capital International Airways, Inc., 102 Misc. 2d 720, 424 N.Y.S. 2d 88 ( N.Y. Civ. 1980 )( flight canceled; all necessary measures not taken ).74 . Peralta v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 1999 WL 193393 ( N.D. Cal. 1999 ).75 . Obuzor v. Sabena Belgian World Airlines, 1999 WL 223162 ( S.D.N.Y. 1999 ) .76 . Tasar v. Pakistan International Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 18,618 ( S.D. Tex. 1982 ).77 . Bank of Nova Scotia v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 17,378 ( S.D.N.Y. 1981 ).78 . Cohen v. Varig Airlines, Inc., 62 A.D. 2d 324, 405 N.Y.S. 2d 44 ( 1978 ).79 . Kupferman v. Pakistan International Airlines, 198 Misc. 2d 485, 438 N.Y.S. 2d 189 ( 1981 ).80 . Shah v. Pan American World Services, Inc., 148 F. 3d 84 ( 2d Cir. 1998 ).81 . In re Air Disaster at Lockerbie, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,252 ( 2d Cir. 1994 ).82 . Farmilant v. Singapore Airlines, Ltd., 18 CCH Aviation Cases 17,430 ( N.D. Ill. 1983 ). See also: Fourth Circuit: Schaefer v. National Airlines, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 17,354 ( D. Md. 1980 ). Fifth Circuit: Smith v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc., 412 F. Supp. 641 ( N.D. Tex. 1976 ), mod'd 567 F. 2d 290 ( 5th Cir. 1978 ). Sixth Circuit: Sherrod v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 17,958 ( E.D. Tenn. 1980 ). Ninth Circuit: West v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 23 CCH Aviation Cases 17,350 ( 9th Cir. 1991 ). State Courts: Louisiana: Vick v. National Airlines, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 18,404 ( La. App. 1982 ). Montana: Johnson v. Northwest Orient Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,220 ( Mont. Sup. 1982 ). New York: Freedman v. Northwest Airlines Inc., 25 CCH Aviation Cases 17,299 ( N.Y. Civ. 1996 ). Pennsylvania: Angerman v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 30 Pa. D. & C. 3d 256 ( Pa. Com. Pleas 1983 ).83 . Liechtung v. Tower Air, Inc., New York Law Journal, January 11, 1999, p. 34, col. 3 ( N.Y. Sup. ).84 . Sporn v. Metro International Airways, Inc., 17 CCH Aviation Cases 18,207 ( N.Y. Sup. 1983 ).85 . Koczara v. Wayne County, Index No. 99-900422, Wayne Cty. Cir. Ct., Michigan.86 . Freedman v. Northwest Airlines Inc., 25 CCH Aviation Cases 17,299 ( N.Y. Civ. 1996 ).87 . Prechtl v. Travel House of Garden City, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,182 ( N.Y. Civ. 1980 ), mod'd 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,183 ( N.Y. App. Term. 1981 ).88 . Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., 73 A.D. 2d 521, 422 N.Y.S. 2d 407 ( 1979 ).89 . Reservation Desk v. A.L.I.A., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,529 ( N.D. Tex. 1988 ). See also: Third Circuit: Brunwasser v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 16 CCH Aviation Cases 17,792 ( W.D. Pa. 1981 ). Fifth Circuit: Jawal v. Britsh Airways, 812 F. Supp. 713 ( S.D. Texas 1992 ). Ninth Circuit: Lathigra v. British Airways, 41 F. 3d 535 ( 9th Cir. 1994 ). State Courts District of Columbia: Craig v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 19 CCH Aviation Cases 17,954 ( D.C. Super. 1985 ). New York: Adamson v. American Airlines, Inc., 105 Misc. 2d 787, 433 N.Y.S. 2d 366, aff'd 87 A.D. 2d 785, 449 N.Y.S. 2d 487, rev'd 58 N.Y. 2d 42, 457 N.Y.S. 2d 771, 444 N.E. 2d 21 ( 1982 ).90 . Sporn v. Metro International Airways, Inc., 17 CCH Aviation Cases 18,207 ( N.Y. Sup. 1983 ).91 . Jawal v. British Airways, 812 F. Supp. 713 ( S.D. Texas 1992 ).92 . Chendrimada v. Air-India, 802 F. Supp. 1089 ( S.D.N.Y. 1992 ). See also: New York: Robinson v. American Airlines, New York Law Journal, June 19, 1995, p. 33, col. 5 ( White Plains City Ct. 1995 )( passenger misses flight because airline advances departure time by ten minutes; " times shown in timetable or elsewhere are not guaranteed " ). Puerto Rico: Padua v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,716 ( P.R. Sup. 1988 )( clause in contract of carriage stating that timetables are not guaranteed enforced ).93 . Padua v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,716 ( P.R. Sup. 1988 ).94 . Robinson v. American Airlines, New York Law Journal, June 19, 1995, p. 33, col. 5 ( N.Y. Civ. 1995 ).95 . Martinez v. American Airlines, 74 F. 3d 247 ( 11th Cir. 1996 ).96 . A summary of each airline's contract terms may be found in United States Air Carriers, Conditions of Contract, Summary of Incorporated Terms ( Domestic Air Transportation ) published by the Air Transport Association of America, Washington, D.C.97 . Wolst v. American Airlines, Inc., 668 F. Supp. 1117 ( N.D. Ill. 1987 ).98 . Padua v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,716 ( P.R. Sup. 1988 ).99 . Macintosh v. Interface Group, 1999 Mass. Super. LEXIS 3 ( Mass. Super. 1999 ).100 . Robinson v. American Airlines, New York Law Journal, June 19, 1995, p. 33, col. 5 ( N.Y. Civ. 1995 ).101 . Sethi v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 21 CCH Aviation Cases 18,400 ( Ga. App. 1989 ).102 . Madia v. Austin Travel Agency, 19 CCH Aviation Cases 17,277 ( N.D. Ill. 1984 ). See also: Ninth Circuit: Harby v. Sadeeh, 816 F. 2d 436 ( 9th Cir. 1987 ). State Courts New York: Ressler v. Korean Airlines, Inc., New York Law Journal, August 19, 1994, p. 22, col. 2 ( N.Y. Civ. 1994 ).103 . Coughlin v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,406 ( 9th Cir. 1988 ).104 . Freedman v. Northwest Airlines Inc., 25 CCH Aviation Cases 17,299 ( N.Y. Civ. 1996 ).105 . Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., 73 A.D. 2d 521, 422 N.Y.S. 2d 407 ( 1979 ).106 . Larken v. Tourlite International Inc., 23 CCH Aviation Cases 17,262 ( N.Y. Civ. 1991 ).107 . Carro v. Parente World Travel Center, 23 CCH Aviation Cases 18,345 ( N.D. Ohio 1991 ).108 . Neal v. Republic Airlines, 19 Aviation Cases 17,499 ( N.D. Ill. 1985 )]. See also: New York: Geelan v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 15 CCH Aviation Cases 18,356 ( N.Y. Sup. 1980 ), aff'd 83 A.D. 2d 538, 441 N.Y.S. 2d 474 ( 1981 ), appeal dismissed 54 N.Y. 2d 1025 (1981 ).109 . Harris v. Waikane Corp., 484 F. Supp. 372 ( D. Hawaii 1980 ).110 . Agosto v. Leisure World Travel, inc., 36 Ohio App. 2d 213, 304 N.E. 2d 910 ( 1973 ).111 . The Majestic, 166 U.S. 375, 17 S. Ct. 597, 41 L. Ed. 1039 ( 1887 ).112 . Klakis v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., New York Law Journal, November 30, 1978, p. 6, col. 2 ( N.Y. Sup. 1978 ), rev'd 73 A.D. 2d 521, 422 N.Y.S. 2d 407 ( 1979 ).113 . DeVera v. Japan Airlines, 24 CCH Aviation Cases 18,317 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ).114 . Jamil v. Kuwait Corp., 772 F. Supp. 482 ( D.C.C. ).115 . Bernstein v. Cunard Line, Ltd., 19 CCH Aviation Cases 17,485 ( S.D.N.Y. 1985 ). See also: Tenth Circuit: Hill v. Eastern Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 18,100 ( D. Kan. 1982 )( misrepresented weather conditions ). State Courts Montana: Johnson v. Northwest Orient Airlines, 17 CCH Aviation Cases 17,220 ( Mont. Sup. 1982 )( bad weather conditions ).116 . Feuer v. Value Vacations, 18 CCH Aviation Cases 17,593 ( N.Y. Sup. 1983 ). See also: Second Circuit: Arkin v. Trans International Airlines, 568 F. Supp. 11 ( E.D.N.Y. 1982 ).117 . Arrow Air, Inc. v. Dole, 784 F. 2d 1118 ( D.C. Cir. 1986 ) ( 8,000 travelers stranded; air carrier must return stranded passengers notwithstanding lack of payment ).118 . Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., 562 F. Supp. 960 ( S.D.N.Y. 1982 ). See also: New York: Feuer v. Value Vacations, Inc., 18 CCH Aviation Cases 17,593 ( N.Y. Sup. 1983 ).119 . Accomando v. Trans National Travel, 23 CCH Aviation Cases 18,140 ( Mass. Sup. 1991 ).120 . Neilan v. Value Vacations, Inc., 116 F.R.D. 431 ( S.D.N.Y. 1987 ).121 . Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp,., 562 F. Supp. 960 ( S.D.N.Y. 1982 ).122 . 14 C.F.R. Part 250.123 . 14 C.F.R. Part 250.5.124 . West v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 23 CCH Aviation Cases 17,352 ( 9th Cir. 1991 ).125 . Semrod v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion, 22 CCH Aviation Cases 17,747 ( D.N.J. 1990 ).126 . Lopez v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 677 F. Supp. 181 ( S.D.N.Y. 1988 ).127 . Schaeffer v. Cavallero, 1998 WL 856085 ( S.D.N.Y. 1998 ). See also: Second Circuit: Rombom v. United Air Lines, 876 F. Supp. 214 ( S.D.N.Y. 1994 ). Fourth Circuit: Ruiz v. People Express Airlines, 20 CCH Aviation Cases 17,312 ( 4th Cir. 1986 ). Fifth Circuit: U.S. v. Kilpatrick, 757 F. 2d 1250 ( 5th Cir. 1985 ).128 . Macintosh v. Interface Group, 1999 Mass. Super. LEXIS 3 ( Mass. Super. 1999 ).129 . Huggar v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1026 ( N.D. Ill. 1999 ).130 . McMurray v. Capital International Airways, Inc., 102 Misc. 2d 720, 424 N.Y.S. 2d 88 ( 1980 ).131 . Reservation Desk v. ALIA, 21 CCH Aviation Cases 17,529 ( N.D. Tex. 1988 ).132 . Smith v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc., 412 F. Supp. 641 ( N.D. Tex. 1976 ), mod'd 567 F. 2d 290 ( 5th Cir. 1978 ).133 . Semrod v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion, 22 CCH Aviation Cases 17,747 ( D.N.J. 1990 ).134 . Vick v. National Airlines, Inc. 16 CCH Aviation Cases 18,404 ( La. App. 1982 ).135 . Das v. Royal Jordanian Airlines, 766 F. Supp. 169 ( S.D.N.Y. 1991 ).136 . See Dickerson, Class Actions: The Law of 50 States, Law Journal Press, New York, 1981-2000 ( updated annually ). Web Page http://members.aol.com/class50/index.html.137 . Neilan v. Value Vacations, 605 F. Supp. 1227 ( S.D.N.Y. 1985 ).138 . Irving Trust Company v. Nationwide Leisure Corp., 95 F.R.D. 51 ( S.D.N.Y. 1982 ).139 . Liechtung v. Tower Air, Inc., New York Law Journal, January 11, 1999, p. 34, col. 3 ( N.Y. Sup. ).140 . Koczara v. Wayne County, Index No. 99-900422, Wayne Cty. Cir. Ct., Michigan ( class certification granted )