The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P, then 77 years old, was a passenger on D's flight from Orlando, Florida, to LaGuardia. After disembarking from the aircraft, P proceeded to a designated baggage carousel located in D's terminal in order to retrieve her luggage. P describes the terminal as 'bedlam.' People were crowded around the baggage carousel and were 'rowdy and unruly, pushing and shoving each other, grabbing their luggage from the moving carousel by whatever means possible. D did not provide any personnel or make any cautionary announcement to quell the turmoil; nor did the airline cordon off a separate area in which elderly and disabled passengers could safely obtain their luggage. An unidentified man to one side of P reached across the conveyor belt, grabbed his satchel with great force, and unwittingly triggered a domino effect. His bag collided with another's suitcase, which, in turn, fell off the carousel, toppling P. As a result, she suffered a broken hip. P sued D, claiming that D did not exercise reasonable care to ensure her safety. She complained that the airline negligently failed to take any crowd-control measures or to provide a safe method by which elderly and disabled people could retrieve their luggage. P alleged that her physical injuries were the proximate result of D's inaction. During discovery, a representative of D stated that there had been other, similar accidents at D's baggage terminals. D refused to respond to P's subsequent request for information regarding accidents of like kind that had occurred at or near D baggage carousels, and at a pretrial conference, the district judge declined to require D to give such information. D moved for summary judgment in part that P had failed to establish a prima facie case of negligence on D's part. The court granted D’s motion, stating that P had 'failed to establish that D's duty as an air carrier encompasses a duty to control the crowd at the baggage retrieval area or designate a separate area for elderly passengers.' The district court concluded that d had no obligation 'to protect against or warn of potential negligent conduct by third persons within the terminal building. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.