Stagl v. Delta Air Lines
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
117 F.3d 76 (1997)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Eleanor Stagl (plaintiff) was a passenger on a flight operated by Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Delta) (defendant). In the baggage-claim area, the flight’s passengers were pushing and shoving to retrieve bags. Delta did not provide any signs or personnel to discourage this behavior. In the chaos, a bag was bumped into Stagl, knocking her down and breaking her hip. Stagl sued Delta for negligence. The trial court found that Delta did not owe Stagl a duty to maintain a safe baggage-retrieval area and granted summary judgment to Delta. Stagl appealed. The appellate court found that Delta did owe Stagl a duty, and the case was remanded for trial. At trial, the court excluded Stagl’s evidence about the airport conditions around the baggage carousel as irrelevant. The trial court also excluded testimony from Stagl’s expert mechanical-engineer witness because, although the witness had expertise in human-machine interactions, he did not have specific experience with airline-baggage systems. At the end of the trial, the trial court directed a verdict for Delta on the grounds that Stagl had not presented any evidence of similar, prior accidents. The trial court believed that prior-accident evidence was necessary to show that the accident was foreseeable, which was an element of Stagl’s negligence claim. Stagl appealed the evidentiary rulings and the directed verdict.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Calabresi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 781,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.