U.S. TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS RULES AGAINST SKYWEST IN PERSONAL INJURY CASE
September 21, 2022
On August 22, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit announced its decision to reverse and remand a district court ruling that dismissed a passenger’s personal injury claim against SkyWest Airlines (“SkyWest”) for its alleged failure to exercise due care.
The Plaintiff originally brought suit following a 2019 incident during which a SkyWest flight attendant allegedly “carelessly” struck her with a beverage cart. The Plaintiff further alleged that during the flight’s beverage service the flight attendant “caused the beverage cart to forcefully strike” her shoulder resulting in a significant injury. The complaint included claims of negligence and breach of contract by the airline under Utah state law. The Plaintiff alleged that her injuries were caused by SkyWest’s breach of its contractual obligations to provide “safe carriage and transport from her origination to her destination” and to “exercise professional, careful, and safe conduct and judgment.” In response, SkyWest made a motion to dismiss the negligence claim based on the Airline Deregulation Act (“ADA”) which generally preempts state laws related to “a price, route, or service of an air carrier”, and to dismiss the contract claim due to redundance and a failure by the Plaintiff to identify a specific contract or contractual provision that was breached. The district court agreed with SkyWest finding that the negligence and contract claims were both preempted by the ADA and subsequently dismissed the whole complaint on that basis.
On Appeal, the Court found that when applying the Supreme Court’s “connection with or reference to” test, which is applicable in ADA preemption cases, the Plaintiff’s negligence and contract claims were not preempted under the ”reference to” part of the test because the state laws invoked by the Plaintiff did not refer to airline prices, routes, or services, but rather to Utah’s common-law negligence and contract causes of action, which can be considered laws of general applicability that apply to any individuals or corporations whose actions may foreseeably injure others or those who enter into contractual arrangements. The Appeals Court also found that the Plaintiff’s claims were not based on state laws that were impermissibly “connected with” airline prices, routes, or services. Given this, the Appeals Court determined that a finding in favor of the Plaintiff would not affect SkyWest’s services, and would only require SkyWest to “honor its contractual obligations and to comply with the general duty of care toward those who might be foreseeably injured by its affirmative acts” as it believed any other business would be required to do, and that SkyWest had failed to show how a ruling in the Plaintiff’s favor would limit its choices regarding prices, routes, and services. As a result, the case was reversed and sent back to the district court for reconsideration.
If you have any questions, please contact Evelyn Sahr (esahr@eckertseamans.com 202-659-6622) or Drew Derco (dderco@eckertseamans.com 202-659-6665).
Share This Post
Authors
