Legal Opinion
Karfunkel v. Compagnie Nationale Air France
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 4, 1977No. 76 Civ. 3138PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WYATT, District Judge.
There are two motions before the Court. The first in point of time was made by plaintiffs to strike the Third, Fourth and Fifth affirmative defenses in the amended answer of Compagnie Nationale Air France (Air France). Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f). The three affirmative defenses questioned by the motion assert defenses based on the Warsaw Convention or on the Montreal Agreement (later mentioned in connection with these defenses).
The second motion was made by Air France to dismiss the claims against it for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. Such a motion is authorized by…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Broughton v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Edmund J. Smith v. Canadian Pacific Airways, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
- Husserl v. Swiss Air Transport Company, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
- Rosman v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Husserl v. Swiss Air Transport Company, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. FloydSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Raysor v. Port Authority Of New York And New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- People Ex Rel. Compagnie Nationale Air France v. GilibertoIllinois Supreme Court · 1978
- Floyd v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1989
- Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. KingSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.