Mark_K

I remember watching some TV show recently which seemed to imply that on international flights a plane was under the jurisdiction of the country the plane left from until it touched down.

Anybody know if that's true, and if so, how it might pertain to this case, and what Japan's dram shop liability laws are like?

SAT Lawyer

I'm not sure what forum's laws will apply after the choice of law analysis is applied or what the specific laws are of the potential jurisdictions involved, but this sounds like a classic case where the plaintiff's contributory negligence should bar his recovery. In a negligence lawsuit brought in Texas, a plaintiff who is more than 50% responsible for his own injuries will be barred from recovery.

This lawsuit is somewhat unusual in that the typical negligence lawsuit against a commercial server of alcohol is one involving a third party, most commonly when the victim of a drunk driving accident sues the bar that continued to serve the drunk driver. In such cases, recovery is often sought from the bar owner because the drunk driver may not have sufficient assets to cover a judgment or settlement.

The specific legal principles aside, I find it absurd for anyone to blame another person for serving him too much alcohol. Nobody held a gun to Mr. Shimamoto's head and forced him to drink beyond his tolerance. Unfortunately, it's incidents like these that contribute to flight attendants cutting off premium cabin passengers prematurely. My last trip on UA (SkyWest, actually), another gentlemen and I in first class were told that we couldn't have more than four drinks even though both of us were well-behaved, lucid, and had a lengthy international connection ahead, not a drive home.

UpstateNY

Right, except liability under the Warsaw Convention is strict, and even if this were a domestic flight, UA as a common carrier is under a heightened standard of care.

In this case, Mr. S isn't the plaintiff -- it's his wife -- so it is analogous to the case you mention, of the victim of a drunk driver suing the bar that got the driver soused.

A lot of people on this thread are talking about blame and responsibility, but the law governing accidents and personal injuries isn't all about those concepts. Putting on my torts teacher hat, it's not all about the ex post point of view. Tort law is also about the ex ante point of view -- i.e. deterrence, and creating incentives for everyone to engage in optimal levels of risk-taking (or care-taking, if you prefer). You want airlines to have some incentive not to get passengers so likkered up that they go out and do dangerous things. Why? Because, in some cases, as between the airline and the victim of some subsequent drunken act -- driving, an assault, etc. -- the airline was in a better position to take an effective precaution against the injury.

Traveling Consultant

we need to ban all alcohol on flights

Or people could just act like adults and take responsibility for their actions

BenjaminNYC

Given the size of UA's wine glasses, I need refills a lot more often than every 20 minutes.

cblaisd

Very helpful post. Thank you.

Hardly the worst idea I ever heard.

Actually, it's both/and -- "acting like an adult" in the course of one's official duties under the FARs (accepting, for the moment for the sake of argument, that indeed those FARs were violated by the FAs -- which we of course don't know yet) means not serving those who shouldn't be served.

restlessinRNO

And how exactly are the FAs supposed to determine this, if the pax is seated quietly in F and asks politely for a refill? Should they ask him to blow into a breathalyzer before offering any more Cotes du Rhone on this long transpacific flight?

skywalkerLAX

I wouldnt mind as I dont drink onboard anyways.

Though I would not cut this benefit from others who enjoy their occasional drink or wine.

ElmhurstNick

Of course not, that's why there is both OMNI and the Gary airport.

UpstateNY

Under negligence law, all anyone has to do is act with reasonable care. That means doing what an ordinarily prudent person would do in the same circumstances -- not making every call perfectly and never making mistakes. What does reasonable care mean? Take my torts class and we'll talk about it for most of the semester, but in this case it means, essentially, if there are indications that someone is drinking way too much, getting out of control, becoming belligerent, etc., you're on notice that you may be over-serving. Defendants in these cases always say "what am I supposed to do, make everyone blow a breathalyzer?" and the answer courts frequently give is "no, that's not what reasonable care requires, but if someone is so falling-down drunk that they can hardly make their drink order intelligible, you may be on notice that they've had too much."

That's another point about lawsuits. What you can claim is one thing, what you can prove is another. Ms. S can allege that the FA should have known that Mr. S was drinking too much, but the evidence may not turn out to support her claim -- that would mean losing on summary judgment or at trial. (All this assumes that domestic tort law governs which, as I've indicated above, is probably not the case.) We don't know yet what's going to happen as the lawsuit proceeds through discovery, pretrial motions, trial, post-trial motions, and appeal. That's why it's premature to get all exercised about "frivolous" lawsuits at this stage.

BenjaminNYC

Why only "occasional" drink? That's all you believe should be protected? You're saying one shouldn't drink on every flight, even if they don't get drunk?

cblaisd

BPOTD!

Remarkably helpful. Thank you. It would be interesting to see how the "reasonable care" standard would play out through the process as you describe it when a reasonable adult knows that serving x drinks in y time simply physiologically can't help but have an effect in the z range (notwithstanding the confined opportunities to misbehave in an F seat, although that certainly hasn't stopped too many people from finding ways).

restlessinRNO

UpstateNY - an excellent and thoughtful explanation.

I think it is unreasonable to expect FAs to in fact become alcohol physiologists. Are they supposed to remember that pax#4 was served a cocktail by another FA 1 1/2 hours ago and now requests a glass of wine. But did he has a pre-departure drink? How much does he weigh? If I give him a glass of wine now, does that mean no port with the cheese tray? If I go on break, should I inform the other FAs that I served him another drink?

gbsfo

I think it is just the American culture. Lawsuit after lawsuit. The somewhat ironic thing, to me at least, is that looking in from the outside one sees Americans as wanting to stand on their own two feet, work hard for a living and be independent (bailouts being a very bitter pill to swallow for many).

You would think these qualities would instill a feeling of personal responsibility for ones actions but that does not appear to be the case. When it comes to something going wrong it is never their fault, but someone else for not daddying them. I suppose the independent, free thinking malarkey goes out of the window when people see $$$$ lawsuit potential.

Whatever happened to Mea culpa?

tom911

I wonder what happened to Dianne Feinstein's legislation back in 2001 that was going to limit passengers to two drinks per domestic flight? Wonder why she didn't want to touch international flights and only cover domestic.http://archives.cnn.com/2001/TRAVEL/...ing/index.html