Andrews v. United Airlines case brief summary
24 F.3d 39 (9th Cir. 1994)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiff passenger was injured when a briefcase fell out of an overhead compartment in one of defendant airline's planes and landed on her. In her negligence suit, the trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment.
DISCUSSION
The court reversed a judgment that granted defendant airline summary judgment in plaintiff passenger's personal injury suit. A genuine issue of material fact existed on whether defendant had a duty to do more than merely warn passengers, such as plaintiff, about the possibility of items falling from overhead compartments.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
24 F.3d 39 (9th Cir. 1994)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff passenger
challenged a judgment from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California that granted defendant airline's
motion for summary judgment in a suit in plaintiff alleged she
sustained personal injuries when a briefcase fell from an airplane's
overhead compartment.CASE FACTS
Plaintiff passenger was injured when a briefcase fell out of an overhead compartment in one of defendant airline's planes and landed on her. In her negligence suit, the trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court reversed the judgment.
- The court ruled that based upon plaintiff's evidence, defendant had received numerous complaints about objects falling from the overhead compartments, and a genuine issue of material fact existed on whether defendant had a duty to do more than merely warn its passengers about the dangers of such falling objects.
- The court reasoned that given its prior notice of the falling objects, coupled with increased carry-on luggage, the issue of whether defendant took sufficient precautions in discharging its duty as a common carrier to protect its passengers warranted a trial.
The court reversed a judgment that granted defendant airline summary judgment in plaintiff passenger's personal injury suit. A genuine issue of material fact existed on whether defendant had a duty to do more than merely warn passengers, such as plaintiff, about the possibility of items falling from overhead compartments.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
No comments:
Post a Comment