Lawsuit

[tadjr]

LINK to article.

Sounds like she's suing the wrong people. If she was heading thru security then that means that US must have checked her in and didnt deny her boarding. TSA stopped her for her liquids. Anything from that point wouldnt have anything to do with US unless the TSA cleared her and the airline specifically said no without further justification. Sounds like shes grasping at straws in suing US. Guess we'll have to wait to the court date to hear the whole story.

 

[robbedagain]

i agree w you she got wrong folks

 

[SolidCactus]

another frivolous lawsuit to tie up the system and waste our tax dollars. yay.

 

[ussnark]

another frivolous lawsuit to tie up the system and waste our tax dollars. yay.

Not certain how tax dollars gets spent on a personal lawsuit against US.

 

[GolfNovember]

She's going after the wrong people. That's like blaming the liquor store where you bought beer at and suing them because you were charged with a DUI. It's the wrong people as Tad and Robb'dAgain said. It's interesting to read, though.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Easier to sue a private entity than the gummint.

 

[black and gold]

Not certain how tax dollars gets spent on a personal lawsuit against US.

Uhhh, judges, clerks, court rooms...

 

[SpinDoc]

Uhhh, judges, clerks, court rooms...

Uhhh..... an attorney who must have been sleeping for the past 6.5 years. Hello Mr. Dumas, the federal government has been responsible for security screening at all airports since at least 2002.

How can US Airways be held responsible for mistakes made by the TSA? This lawsuit will be thrown out in a heartbeat because it names the wrong defendant.

 

[Frontier69]

LINK to article.

Sounds like she's suing the wrong people. If she was heading thru security then that means that US must have checked her in and didnt deny her boarding. TSA stopped her for her liquids. Anything from that point wouldnt have anything to do with US unless the TSA cleared her and the airline specifically said no without further justification. Sounds like shes grasping at straws in suing US. Guess we'll have to wait to the court date to hear the whole story.

I cant believe she actually has an attorney for this litigation. If this woman is paying by the hour, then what attorney wouldnt take the case. If the script of the article reflects the facts as they are, then a dismissal will be forthcoming and the woman better go after Uncle Sam instead.

 

[necigrad]

US should just settle this. Here's why and how:

The lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction directing the airline to take affirmative steps to remedy illegal discriminatory conduct.

Done. Since there is no illegal discriminatory conduct, it's remedied by default. No action is required to comply. Non action is compliant with the demand.

It also seeks reasonable attorney fees and costs,

Also done. The amount is zero. Since the complaint is not valid, nor against the offending party, there are no reasonable fees.

...and damages and other relief in an amount to be determined at trial.

Settlement, no trial, thus no determined damages.

Damn, I should be a lawyer! LOL

 

[hp_fa]

A better trial tactic is an Offer of Judgment under Rule 68 Fed.R.Civ.P. Make the offer immediately and make the offer for some sum like $100.00. If the plaintiff does not get a better result after a trial then the plaintiff must pay the defendants costs in the case, and they can be considerable.

 

[gizmo_sc]

What an IDOT...... AIRWAYS will laugh at this ....

 

[YVINTERN]

Yeah...it's like I should really sue JetBlue for discrimination but did I sue...no people need to grow up seriously there HAS been DISCRIMINATION and there always WILL be DISCRIMINATION in this wonderful country we all grew up in.

 

[SpinDoc]

What an IDOT...... AIRWAYS will laugh at this ....

What in the heck is an IDOT, sparky?

 

[Dog Wonder]

What in the heck is an IDOT, sparky?

Some one with a yelling spelling problem?