Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who has the right to order/halt an evacuation?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
    "endanger the lives and limbs of his passengers"...

    Is that an idiom or what?

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • #17
      TeeVee, Can you explain the "in excess of 10,000.00 dollars" part? Is that a standard formula?

      Obviously the plaintiff considers that he deserves, and expects to receive, much more than that in term of loss of income, difficulty to get another job, malicious defamation, emotional distress, and punitive damages.

      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

      Comment


      • #18
        Bravo. The case is very clear. The airline has no chance.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #19
          Gabriel, "life and limb" es un dicho. it generally means that a single action, for example, not evacuating the plane, may injure some (limb) and kill others (life).

          the reason they put in more than $10,000 is so that they don't have to ask for a specific amount. they can and will amend the complaint later and may at that time put in more realistic numbers. or, they could wait for trial and simply prove with evidence what the actual damages are (past, present, and future salary, mental suffering etc) and the jury can award him what they believe to be the correct number is.

          10k is not standard. some lawyers like to write "in an amount to be proven at trial"

          while i think Kinzer has a very good chance of winning, experience with judges and juries has taught me never to think or say that any case is a slam dunk.

          i will follow it and try to keep all advised.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by elaw View Post
            Hmm... that being the case, a conspiracy theorist might wonder if this could be a deliberate strategic act, so they could give the guy his job back as a "concession"...
            Won't be the first time. Or the last, regrettably.

            Comment


            • #21
              as i predicted the case was removed to federal court

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                as i predicted the case was removed to federal court
                What does that mean?

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  What does that mean?
                  Similar but different procedural rules. Judges are a LOT less tolerant of BS and delays. Juries tend to be (and don't ask my how or why) much more conservative in their verdicts. The perception and it may be true is that verdicts in federal court are lower than in state court.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                    Similar but different procedural rules. Judges are a LOT less tolerant of BS and delays. Juries tend to be (and don't ask my how or why) much more conservative in their verdicts. The perception and it may be true is that verdicts in federal court are lower than in state court.
                    Please excuse my ignorance, which is greater than you perceived it to be.

                    So I understand that the case was moved FROM a state court TO a federal court?
                    And that kind of change tends to favour the pilot case? (because of a trend to stricter judges and juries and higher verdicts in federal courts when compared with state courts)?

                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      Please excuse my ignorance, which is greater than you perceived it to be.
                      only if you excuse mine!

                      yes. from state to federal.
                      no. likely favors allegiant since juries in federal court tend to be more conservative and award LESS than in state court. and no, i have no idea why that is.

                      what may favor the pilot here is that federal judges allow a lot less BS than state court judges--the kind of BS big corporations' lawyers like to play.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                        only if you excuse mine!

                        yes. from state to federal.
                        no. likely favors allegiant since juries in federal court tend to be more conservative and award LESS than in state court. and no, i have no idea why that is.

                        what may favor the pilot here is that federal judges allow a lot less BS than state court judges--the kind of BS big corporations' lawyers like to play.
                        I hate to say it, but you suggest they do an all-around better job of cutting through the BS...
                        They don't fall for the corporations attempt to muscle the little guy, while at the same time, calling BS on the little guy's efforts to focus on the deep pockets, and get possibly more than a fair settlement.
                        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                          I hate to say it, but you suggest they do an all-around better job of cutting through the BS...
                          They don't fall for the corporations attempt to muscle the little guy, while at the same time, calling BS on the little guy's efforts to focus on the deep pockets, and get possibly more than a fair settlement.
                          look, i won't go so far as to say for sure what really goes on or why. fact is both state and federal draw from the same jury pool--the public. but i've been told and have seen that jury verdicts in federal cases tend to be much lower, which is why the big corps always remove to federal court when they can. this has little to do with the judges.

                          the flip side is their attorneys are given very short leashes by the judges who basically have ZERO tolerance for shenanigans commonly played in state courts.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X