Legal Opinion
Phifer v. ICELANDAIR
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 26, 2011No. 09-56858PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BYBEE, Circuit Judge:
Today we clarify that a plaintiff does not have to prove an airline violated a Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) standard to establish that there was an “accident” under Article 17 of the Convention of the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Transportation by Air (“Montreal Convention”). Because the district court held otherwise, requiring the plaintiff to provide evidence the airline had failed to meet FAA requirements in order to survive summary judgment, we reverse and remand.
I
After entering her assigned row on Icelandair Flight No. 656,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Air France v. SaksSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Olympic Airways v. HusainSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Husain v. Olympic AirwaysCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Prescod v. AMR, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Guy Caman, an Individual v. Continental Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
3Cited by15 opinions
- Narayanan Ex Rel. Narayanan v. British AirwaysCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Cohen v. American Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021
- DeJoseph v. Continental Airlines, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- Moore v. British Airways PLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2022
- Narayanan Ex Rel. Narayanan v. British AirwaysCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.