This is no bar bet, it’s a lawsuit. Can you get drunk on a flight, then sue the airline for giving you the booze?
A husband and wife are suing United Airlines for “negligently” overserving alcohol during a flight from Osaka, Japan, to San Francisco, saying the carrier’s drinks fueled the domestic violence involving the two shortly after their plane landed.
Fortified with Burgundy wine allegedly supplied at 20-minute intervals by United crew members during the December 2006 trip, Yoichi Shimamoto became so inebriated “that he could not manage himself,” according to a lawsuit filed Dec. 5 in U.S. District Court in Tampa.
Shimamoto was arrested, accused of disorderly conduct and battery after he struck his wife, Ayisha, six times, injuring her face and upper lip as they were heading through U.S. Customs in San Francisco, the complaint said.
The lawsuit is highly unusual and will likely hinge on whether Chicago-based United, in effect, operated a flying bar that’s subject to the same legal liabilities as earthbound drinking establishments, legal experts said.
At issue: whether laws that hold bars and restaurants responsible for harm caused by intoxicated patrons apply when the bartender and drinker are flying at 40,000 feet across international territory.
“United’s first defense will be there’s no tort action like this in international airspace,” said James Speta, professor at Northwestern University Law School.
Although Yoichi Shimamoto was charged and sentenced to 18 months’ probation, the couple contend that United Airlines ultimately was responsible for his violent outburst, according to the lawsuit.
United’s “conduct was egregious because it knew or should have known that over-serving a passenger alcohol on an international flight would have negative consequences,” the complaint said. United’s “conduct was deliberate, reckless, intentional and done with disregard for plaintiffs and all passengers.”
Shimamoto, a native of Japan, was prevented from returning to his home country while his case wound through the San Mateo County courts in northern California.
The Shimamotos want United to pick up the $100,000 tab for Yoichi Shimamoto’s bail, and defense and Immigration attorneys’ fees, as well as the costs they incurred to have his probationary sentence transferred to Florida, where his wife had a home.
They also want the airline to pay for pain, suffering, loss of income and “any other relief that is just and proper.”
Responded United spokeswoman Jean Medina: “We believe that a lawsuit that suggests that we are somehow responsible for the consequences of a passenger’s physical assault on his own wife is without any merit whatsoever.”
Airlines are frequently sued for the acts of drunken passengers, typically by flight attendants or other passengers who suffered harm from an unruly traveler during a flight.
What makes this case a rarity, legal experts said, is that it was brought by a person drinking the airline’s alcohol. By filing the lawsuit, the Shimamotos also risk having their private lives exposed by the airline’s attorneys.
“The idea that the server should have stopped serving is often accepted when the injury is to a third person, such as in a drunk-driving situation,” Speta said. “Generally, the courts have not been receptive to people saying, ‘I asked for the drink and you gave it to me.’ ”
But crafting United’s defense will be tricky, legal experts said, because the case involves conflicting international and state law.
Under the Dram Shop Act, which is in place in California, Florida and most states, commercial suppliers of alcohol may be held liable for injuries caused by intoxicated patrons, such as those Ayisha Shimamoto suffered. The threat of such lawsuits has prompted many bars to adopt a policy of not serving anyone who is visibly impaired.
Ayisha Shimamoto’s claim that she was harmed as a result of the carrier’s negligence, one element of the couple’s complaint, would be a likely slam-dunk if United’s conduct in question had taken place in a bar, rather than on an international flight, legal experts said.
Because United’s alleged over-serving occurred on an airplane crossing the Pacific Ocean, a legal no-man’s land, it may be subject to protocols spelled out under the Warsaw Convention, said Bruce Ottley, professor at DePaul College of Law.
The Montreal Protocol of the international treaty limits an airline’s liability to damages that took place onboard the aircraft, or as passengers were embarking or disembarking, Ottley said. That is problematic for the Shimamotos because the battery in their case occurred in an area controlled by the U.S. government, not onboard the United jet.
“The airline is liable for serving him alcohol that caused him to get intoxicated,” Ottley said. “This occurred out in the middle of the Pacific where U.S. law doesn’t apply.”
Carl Hayes, a Tampa lawyer representing the Shimamotos, declined to comment on their lawsuit.
Source: The Chicago Tribune
By: Bmused55 - 19th January 2009 at 13:49
Exactly. No booze on a long haul flight would be a real pain.
Plus, people could always sneak duty free booze into their soft drinks….
Why would a long haul flight be a pain sans alcohol?
By: Hand87_5 - 19th January 2009 at 13:44
Exactly. No booze on a long haul flight would be a real pain.
If you can’t survive a few hours with no booze, you have a problem my friend :diablo:
By: NCL_Chris - 19th January 2009 at 12:40
But that only inconveniances the sensible mature people who can enjoy one or two glasses without going overboard
Exactly. No booze on a long haul flight would be a real pain.
Plus, people could always sneak duty free booze into their soft drinks….
By: steve rowell - 19th January 2009 at 09:19
Alcohol on a plane is (IMHO) as unsafe as cigarettes. It should be banned as smoking was a while back.
But that only inconveniances the sensible mature people who can enjoy one or two glasses without going overboard
By: Hand87_5 - 19th January 2009 at 08:49
Alcohol on a plane is (IMHO) as unsafe as cigarettes. It should be banned as smoking was a while back.
By: AE90 - 19th January 2009 at 04:34
hmm this may well be a good way of clawing back thousands of beer tokens i’ve put behind some bars in my time.. sometimes emerged so drunk i inadvertantly bought a kebab and tried to eat it…
perhaps not. ******s
By: steve rowell - 19th January 2009 at 00:29
Going out for a pint with good friends and good people really can actually be quite pleasant!
Paul
One of the greatest pleasures in life is to share some fine wine …excellent food and stimulating conversation with some very good friends!!!
By: PMN - 16th January 2009 at 17:01
oops sorry Paul if I came across as so cynical, rather clumsy of me. I was getting at the point that its a numbers game and that you need your wits about you when having a drink in a pub otherwise you can end up not having a good time at all.If more bar staff stuck to the rules about not serving customers who were drunk than the problem would not exist.
I used to visit pubs a lot when in the air force but now see little point apart from grabbing some lunch at a Wetherspoons type place in the daytime or early evening. Alcohol is a crafty drug which erodes my self control after just two pints and I would rather not put myself in danger when out of my home. You would not want to be talked to death by me when i have had several pints !!!!
Ha! No need to apologise, it’s OK. I do understand your point now. 🙂
I guess this would probably be a bad time to mention how many Heinekens I consumed before flying back home from Dublin two days ago…
…Then again, you’ll never see me kicking off or being abusive as a result of alcohol. I’m too well practiced for that! 😀
Paul
By: AvgasDinosaur - 16th January 2009 at 16:26
2 more solid candidates for a global NO-FLY LIST if ever I get in a position of power/influence :dev2: Watch out drunks and other in flight chavs:diablo::diablo:
Be lucky
David
By: symon - 16th January 2009 at 16:10
The Scots/Irish would be millionaires if people got away with suing because they became drunk!
By: SOFTLAD - 16th January 2009 at 15:43
Back in the day’s when I worked for Airtours / Mytravel and we had the Skyservice A300-300 we were told that on a Sanford flight to be aware how much alcohol you served as if that person got in a car and killed someone at the other end it was your fault and you would be prosecuted too !!!! The American blame culture has gone too far it’s just crackers. Fair enough if you knew a passenger had had too much and carried on serving them drinks until they were paraletic then I can half see the logic but not if they had just had a couple. 😮
By: Ren Frew - 16th January 2009 at 13:29
If they win this lawsuit the world will have officially gone insane!
1L.
Damn tootin !!!
By: Skymonster - 16th January 2009 at 13:17
If they win this lawsuit the world will have officially gone insane!
The problem is that as stated in the original item, in the USA bar staff ARE held legally accountable for serving (or indeed not serving) intoxicated people – and in law risk consequences including a degree of liability for the resulting actions of intoxicated customers if they serve those customers too much alcolhol.
[For example, a year or so ago I was sat in a bar in Sacramento CA, and having had a couple of beers, before being served another the bar staff asked if I was driving. Replying “no” I got another beer, but when I asked why they asked they said that had I been driving they would not have given me another beer because the consequences had I been in an accident whilst DUI (driving under the influence) would have in part been on the bar staff]
So whilst I totally agree with the sentiments of 1L above, opinion has to be framed in the context of the local laws, which in this particular case at least point to the passengers having some degree of a cause for complaint.
Andy
By: supermario - 16th January 2009 at 12:57
I know on aussie domestic (and most probably international) aircraft they practice responsible service of alcohol. mainly for this reason.
Definatly a good idea, cut the booze when they are too tanked and you can avoid the law suits
By: Hand87_5 - 16th January 2009 at 12:40
Let’s sue every bar and liquor store on this planet:rolleyes:
Pathetic!
By: scotavia - 16th January 2009 at 10:54
oops sorry Paul if I came across as so cynical, rather clumsy of me. I was getting at the point that its a numbers game and that you need your wits about you when having a drink in a pub otherwise you can end up not having a good time at all.If more bar staff stuck to the rules about not serving customers who were drunk than the problem would not exist.
I used to visit pubs a lot when in the air force but now see little point apart from grabbing some lunch at a Wetherspoons type place in the daytime or early evening. Alcohol is a crafty drug which erodes my self control after just two pints and I would rather not put myself in danger when out of my home. You would not want to be talked to death by me when i have had several pints !!!!
By: Bmused55 - 16th January 2009 at 10:30
The things that annoys me more is that these people will likely have started a suit if the staff had refused to serve them alcohol after a certain limit, quoting some sort of human rights garbage.
By: OneLeft - 16th January 2009 at 10:16
If they win this lawsuit the world will have officially gone insane!
1L.
By: PMN - 16th January 2009 at 09:56
So when someone says Lets go out to the bar,pub, club and have a few drinks for a good time just ponder what will really happen. No wonder there are moaning gits in pubs and fights.
That’s quite possibly one of the most cynical statements I’ve ever heard. I purposely don’t mix with people who turn into tossers when they drink and I purposely don’t spend time in drinking establishments where such tossers go. Going out for a pint with good friends and good people really can actually be quite pleasant!
As for the incident in question… All I can say is human stupidity never fails to stun me!
Paul
By: scotavia - 16th January 2009 at 09:31
Gosh what a surprise,drinking alcohol makes you drunk ! At the root of this lawsuit is the two faced attitude to booze. In tiny amounts it is a pleasant addition for many who voyage thru life. But the profits are so big that years of marketing minimise the truth. And the truth is that…it is a depressive drug.
Yes I am being totally honest. So when someone says Lets go out to the bar,pub, club and have a few drinks for a good time just ponder what will really happen. No wonder there are moaning gits in pubs and fights.
Sign In
January 16, 2009 at 7:19 am