Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Warsaw Convention is exclusive remedy for claims arising under its provisions, but recognizing that a plaintiff may bring “a state cause of action when the claim does not arise under the Warsaw Convention.... ”
• holding that only compensatory damages are available under the Warsaw Convention
• stating that a plaintiff \plainly may institute\ a state law cause of action when his or her claim does not arise under the Warsaw Convention
• “allowing each of the individual states to prescribe the elements of damage claims governed by the [Warsaw] Convention would ... ‘create potential frustration of national purposes.’ ”
• discussing at length the history and purpose of Article 25 and concluding that the Convention’s only response to willful misconduct is the lifting of the monetary limit on compensatory damages
• “the Convention should be interpreted as making all actions — other than those not based on the Convention — exclusive under it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).