Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Article 17 does not allow recovery for harm unaccompanied by some physical manifestation of injury
• holding that a carrier could not be held liable under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention for mental injuries that did not accompany bodily injuries
• holding that “an air carrier cannot be held liable under Article 17 when an accident has not caused a passenger to suffer death, physical injury, or physical manifestation of injury”
• holding that treaty interpretation can be informed by parties’ post-enactment conduct
• noting that although the district court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims under the Warsaw Convention and under state law tort and contract theories, it addressed only the Warsaw Convention claim
• providing that although treaty interpretation “begin[s] with the text of the treaty . . . , [o]ther general rules of construction may be brought to bear on difficult or ambiguous passages”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).