04-11-2017, 09:13 PM
(04-11-2017, 05:22 PM)Au165 Wrote: Now your simply resorting to conjecture, as I said Lawyers are citing United's possible illegal removal policy (Based on federal laws) and the fact they may not even have followed the policy he agreed to. As much of a "loser" that you think he may be, he has legal rights. You say United wrong doesn't give him a get out of jail free card, except it legally does if they didn't handle themselves in the legal manor that are established for these situations. Also, the comments form the law enforcement agency who remov3ed him show they were in the wrong in how the handled it.
You are letting your emotions get in the way of logic. There is no "jury trial" coming, he hasn't been charged with anything from what I can find.
Whether or not United's actions were illegal, they are not responsible for the incident with security because the security employees are not United employees. Punitive damages would maybe run into the tens of thousands, not millions, if United did break the law. But otherwise, the settlement amount for involuntary bumps is already clearly defined. You need to separate the refusal of transport from the injury (if a jury agrees this is materially different than an involuntary bump), the latter was not foreseeable and therefore United won't be liable for injuries (airport security is a different defendant).
Jury trials also refer to civil trials, which is what would happen if he sues them. So there's not any lack of logic on my end.
And I've never said he doesn't have legal rights. What I've said is character and our own actions play a factor in determining damages in a civil case. You would agree that cold-cocking a cooperative person with a baton for no reason is very different from a person forcing you to wrestle them out of their chair, and that the former is likely to get a significantly larger injury award?
--------------------------------------------------------
