CHARAS v. TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC.

Nos. 96-15490, 96-15543, 96-15791, 97-55115 and 97-15158.

160 F.3d 1259 (1998)

Cherie CHARAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC., Missouri corporation, Defendant-Appellee. Mildred JACOBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and John Doe, 1-10; Jane Doe, 1-10; Doe Corporations, 1-10; Doe Partners, 1-10; Doe Entities, 1-10, Defendants. Bernice GULLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES; AMR Corporation; American Eagle Airlines, Defendants-Appellees. Elizabeth NEWMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Does 1 Through 50, inclusive, Defendants. Robert A. BEVERAGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Decided November 30, 1998.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gerald A. Clausen and Edward M. Digardi, San Francisco, California, for appellant Gulley.

Saied Kashani, Frederick A. Meiser, Jr., A Law Corp., San Diego, CA (Eugene C. Gratz, Law Offices of Eugene C. Gratz, Laguna Beach, CA, on the briefs for Charas), for appellants Charas, Jacoby, Beverage, and Newman.

Stuart J. Starry (argued), Frank, Woodfill, Lucas & Pressler, LLP, Houston, Texas, Michael S. Danko (on the brief), O'Reilly, Collins & Danko, Menlo Park, California, for appellant Beverage.

Bonnie R. Cohen and Kymberly E. Speer, Nelsen, Greenberg & Cohen, San Francisco, California, for appellees Trans World Airlines, Inc., American Airlines, and Continental Airlines.

Donna H. Kalama, Goodsill, Anderson, Quinn & Stifel, Honolulu, Hawaii, on the briefs for appellee Trans World Airlines.

Harry Carter, Higgs, Fletcher, and Mack, San Diego, California, arguing for appellee American Airlines.

Before: HUG, Chief Judge, BROWNING, FLETCHER, BRUNETTI, THOMPSON, FERNANDEZ, RYMER, T. G. NELSON, KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.


SILVERMAN, Circuit Judge:

These consolidated cases cause us to consider once again the circumstances under which the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, 49 U.S.C. app. § 1305(a)(1) ("ADA"), preempts certain state law claims. Although we have addressed the scope of this statutory preemption before, we have taken these cases en banc sua sponte to rethink our previous decisions.1 We now hold that in enacting the ADA, Congress intended...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases