[quote][b]AMR Corp.’s (AAMRQ) American Airlines and United Continental Holdings Inc. (UAL) lost a bid to avoid a federal trial over negligence claims tied to the hijacking of jetliners used in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that killed about 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
World Trade Center Properties LLC, which owned the twin skyscrapers in lower Manhattan destroyed in the attacks, sued the airlines in 2008 alleging negligence against the carriers for allowing terrorists to board and hijack the planes that were flown into the buildings. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan yesterday said a trial is required.[/b]
On the day of the attacks, two planes were hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center. American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower.
After the attacks, the owners sued insurers, eventually settling for $4.09 billion, the judge said. World Trade Center Properties sued the airlines seeking $8.4 billion, or the estimated cost of replacing the two towers as well as claims of negligence, the judge said in yesterday’s ruling. Hellerstein said he previously rejected the airlines’ bid for summary judgment, or a ruling before trial.
Limited Recovery
Hellerstein also limited the owners’ recovery and determined its destroyed lease on the day of the terrorist attacks to be worth $2.805 billion, the price the World Trade Center Properties agreed to pay the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey for the lease a few months before the 2001 attacks, he said.
The judge yesterday rejected the air carriers’ argument that since the buildings’ owners recovered $4.09 billion from insurance, World Trade Center Properties couldn’t also recover the $2.8 billion sought for the lease.
“On this record, before trial, I am not able to make such findings,” Hellerstein said in his ruling.
Matt Miller, a spokesman for American, said the airline has no comment about the case.
Desmond Barry, a lawyer for the airlines, didn’t immediately return a voice-mail message left at his office seeking comment about the ruling.
The case is In Re September 11 Litigation, 21-MC-101, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-04/american-united-face-trial-over-9-11-towers-destruction[/url]
If this goes through and succeeds would it mean that families that lost loved ones on 9/11 could sue the airline as well?
Woah this is substantially disgusting
I can understand wanting to recover your losses from an unexpected attack like that, but this bit really got to me:
[QUOTE]alleging negligence against the carriers for allowing terrorists to board and hijack the planes[/QUOTE]
Oh come on, this is like suing a gun manufacturer... or the police force for failing to prevent a murder. It's just silly and rude.
im suing george w bush for not preventing hurricane katrina
they could have just shot it down
[quote] sued the airlines in 2008 alleging negligence against the carriers for allowing terrorists to board and hijack the planes that were flown into the buildings[/quote]
Are you shitting me?
[QUOTE=Midas22;37548490]If this goes through and succeeds would it mean that families that lost loved ones on 9/11 could sue the airline as well?[/QUOTE]
Families can always sue WTC Properties for failing to have air defenses (serious neglectance) and not preventing the deaths.
Greed.
"Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies."
[QUOTE=Overv;37548673]Families can always sue WTC Properties for failing to have air defenses (serious neglectance) and not preventing the deaths.[/QUOTE]
You mean for allowing the inside job and having everything rigged with explosives, right?
Somebody is out of money it seems.
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;37548689]Greed.
"Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies."[/QUOTE]
Thousands of people die, and they are trying to make the maximum amount of money out of it. There's securing your interests, then there's squeezing a tragedy for all its worth.
[QUOTE=Ricool06;37548709]Thousands of people die, and they are trying to make the maximum amount of money out of it. There's securing your interests, then there's squeezing a tragedy for all its worth.[/QUOTE]
It's the true American Way.
Cases like this should be dismissed from the start because its just fucking ridiculous.
America.
[QUOTE=Scotchair;37548549]Oh come on, this is like suing a gun manufacturer... or the police force for failing to prevent a murder. It's just silly and rude.[/QUOTE]
That's different. A gun can't think and see who's using it, and the police can't be everywhere at once. I'm not saying the airlines are entirely to blame here, but there were things that could have stopped this had the airlines taken preventative measures before they were made law.
In this case it's more like having a password on a computer. Pre 911 airports didn't have tough "passwords". Just like if you were to leave the password on your computer simple, it would be your own negligence in not having the foresight to set a stronger password if someone were able to log into it.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;37549953]That's different. A gun can't think and see who's using it, and the police can't be everywhere at once. I'm not saying the airlines are entirely to blame here, but there were things that could have stopped this had the airlines taken preventative measures before they were made law.
In this case it's more like having a password on a computer. Pre 911 airports didn't have tough "passwords". Just like if you were to leave the password on your computer simple, it would be your own negligence in not having the foresight to set a stronger password if someone were able to log into it.[/QUOTE]
Bullshit. An attack like that could just as easily happen today. If anyone is to blame for letting them trough it's the us gov. as it's the job of customs to check these things. (And the TSA these days but iirc they are part of a gov. agency.)
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;37550142]Bullshit. An attack like that could just as easily happen today.[/QUOTE]
well yeah I guess so but 9/11 happened anything but "easily"
the chances of it happening were miniscule, the entire post 9/11 world is based off a single statistical fluke
Surely the people responsible for the security at the airport are the people to be sued if anyone? AA and United do not (and did not) handle the security.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
