United sued for hard landing?
May 26, 2017, 3:12 pm
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: 4éme
Posts: 12,026
May 26, 2017, 3:18 pm
#32
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,133
I'd say that the amount they're suing for shows the case has no merit. It's designed for one purpose only - to get United to settle. Someone with a true permanent disability would surely sue for more.
I hope United goes to court and the judge forces the plaintiffs to pay all attorney and court fees.
I hope United goes to court and the judge forces the plaintiffs to pay all attorney and court fees.
May 26, 2017, 3:23 pm
#33
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: 1 thousand
Posts: 2,112
May 26, 2017, 9:05 pm
#34
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,881
Absolutely frivolous, not just weak. Crews only mention the "fasten seatbelt at all times while seated" at least 4 times per flight. Don't pay attention, get burned.
May 26, 2017, 9:19 pm
#35
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: LAS HNL
Programs: DL DM, 5.7 MM, UA 3.1 MM, MARRIOTT PLATINUM, AVIS FIRST, Amex Black Card
Posts: 4,479
The women are seeking $84,894.41 in damages.
I hope UA fights this and they get ZERO!
This took place in Feb 2016.This is a case I wished I was called for Jury Duty.
May 26, 2017, 10:05 pm
#36
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,133
May 26, 2017, 11:18 pm
#37
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AA, UA lowly commoner
Posts: 780
May 27, 2017, 1:25 am
#38
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,580
A person stating that they "wish" they were called for jury duty on this case demonstrates that the challenge would be justified.
May 27, 2017, 1:45 am
#39
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AA, UA lowly commoner
Posts: 780
I understand about cause to dismiss, and I agree about dismissing a person who says they wish they were on the jury, which indicates bias. I just question whether everyone who patronizes a huge corporation, even if frequently enough to earn status, would get thrown off the jury in all cases in which the business is a party.
Last edited by Giggleswick; May 27, 2017 at 1:51 am
May 27, 2017, 10:53 am
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,688
May 27, 2017, 11:00 am
#41
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,133
I would say it's a very high probability. And if not for cause, certainly as a preremptory challenge.
May 27, 2017, 11:25 am
#42
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AMS
Programs: A number, but no status no more
Posts: 3,049
GenevaFlyer
May 27, 2017, 11:34 am
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,908
Why have they waited 2 years before suing? This has frivolous written all over it. And if it was that hard why hasn't anyone else that was on that flight come forward to sue with "injuries". Can't wait to see the first picture of them lifting something heavy or doing some kind of physical activity. I think they are just trying to jump on the UA is settling bandwagon and cash in. If their injuries were so bad and permanent why are they suing for so little?
May 27, 2017, 11:46 am
#44
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,357
PIA = Peoria "International" Airport, Illinois. Did it really have lots of 747s on passenger flights?
May 27, 2017, 12:03 pm
#45
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AMS
Programs: A number, but no status no more
Posts: 3,049