Originally Posted by
kale73
Interesting discussion.
Here's my question for the future SCOTUS justices on the forum:
United's current COC states under Rule 6: Tickets ...
So, are all seven of these "actions" "permitted by law"? In other words, is there any specific legislation that authorizes (or forbids) any of these "actions," particularly numbers 5 & 7?
Also, what happens when a passenger becomes violently ill at a connection point? The above rule says nothing about intent; it's all about actual use. If I have a cancer attack while waiting for a connection at IAH and am hauled off to M.D. Anderson, can United "take legal action" against me?
#5 = we'll send you a new bill, which we expect you to pay
#7 = we might sue you if you don't pay that bill
And what's a cancer attack?
Originally Posted by
mgcsinc
That's why we have jury forms in civil cases.
This is getting tiresome. What remains true is that the original ridiculous idea that jurors just get some facts and decide who is in "the wrong" is not how the law works. We have business torts, deal with it.
You guys seem to be talking past each other. You're accurately describing how the system is supposed to work -- and does in the vast majority of cases. I get the feeling that Boca thinks the system rarely works the way it's supposed to and that juries often do whatever they want - which is simply not the case.
Originally Posted by
mgcsinc
UA could easily generate answers to these rogs. I really think you're overestimating the complexity of all of this.
Or, you could be underestimating the complexity.