James W. Smith v. Comair, Incorporated Delta Airlines, Incorporated

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims are preempted to the extent that they relate to an airline’s boarding practices
• holding that the ADA pre-empts contract claims that “can only be adjudicated by reference to law and policies external to the parties’ bargain”
• holding that denial of boarding did not amount to detention because the plaintiff was not compelled to remain or go anywhere against his will
• holding that plaintiff’s breach of contract claim was preempted by the ADA because it could “only be adjudicated by reference to law and policies external to the parties’ bargain”
• holding that the plaintiffs breach of contract claim was preempted because of, inter alia, the contract claim’s “practical effect on federal law” in “an area of unique federal [regulatory] concern”
• noting that we view the facts at summary judgment in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).