Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.

Citation450 N.E.2d 581,389 Mass. 327
PartiesManuel E. COHEN, executor, v. McDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION et al. 1
Decision Date07 June 1983
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

Robert S. Frank, Jr., Boston (John N. Garner, Boston, with him), for plaintiff.

John F. Mee, Concord, for American Airlines, Inc., was present but did not argue.

Before HENNESSEY, C.J., and WILKINS, LIACOS, ABRAMS and O'CONNOR, JJ.

HENNESSEY, Chief Justice.

This case comes before the court on certification from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (see S.J.C. Rule 1:03, § 1, as amended, --- Mass. --- [1981] ), of three principal and several subsidiary questions involving breach of warranty and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

The certification arises out of a civil action pending in the United States District Court in which the plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages (1) on behalf of the estate of Nellie Cohen for the conscious pain and suffering she endured after learning of the death of one of her sons in an airplane crash, and (2) on the plaintiff's own behalf for the wrongful death of his mother, Nellie Cohen. The plaintiff asserts these claims against both the defendants McDonnell Douglas Corporation (McDonnell Douglas), and American Airlines, Inc. (American Airlines), on theories of negligence. The plaintiff asserts additional claims against the defendant McDonnell Douglas, based on theories of strict liability and breach of warranty.

The defendants moved for summary judgment and dismissal of all claims in the action in the United States District Court on the grounds that Illinois law should be applied and that the relevant law of Illinois does not permit recovery by the plaintiff. On September 16, 1982, a United States District Court judge issued a memorandum and order in which he determined that Massachusetts law applies to the plaintiff's negligence and strict liability claims. The judge further determined that the plaintiff is not entitled under Massachusetts law to recover in his claim against McDonnell Douglas based on strict liability in tort. See Swartz v. General Motors Corp., 375 Mass. 628, 378 N.E.2d 61 (1978). The judge, however, resolved no other issues and instead certified to this court the issues of (1) which State's law applies to the plaintiff's breach of warranty claim; (2) whether, if Massachusetts law applies to the plaintiff's breach of warranty claim, on the facts submitted, the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages; and (3) whether, if Massachusetts law applies to the plaintiff's claims based on negligence, on the facts submitted, the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages. The judge did not certify the question whether Massachusetts law applies to the plaintiff's claim based on negligence, because he had concluded that there was controlling precedent on this issue. The judge requested, however, that if his determination on this issue were in error, we treat the issue of choice of law on the negligence claims as a certified question.

On the facts submitted to this court, we conclude that the law of Massachusetts applies to both the plaintiff's breach of warranty and negligence claims and that, under Massachusetts law, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover damages under either of these theories.

The facts submitted to us are not disputed in any material respect. The deceased, Nellie Cohen, was a Massachusetts resident. She had two sons, the plaintiff, Manuel, a The plaintiff, Ira's brother, learned of the accident while listening to a radio broadcast in California, and surmised that his brother had been a passenger on the aircraft involved. Some seven hours after the airplane crash, the plaintiff telephoned his mother, Nellie Cohen, in Massachusetts to inform her of Ira's death. 3 Shortly after being told of her son's death, Nellie Cohen suffered a series of painful angina attacks, and two days later she died of a heart attack. It was assumed for purposes of the motions for summary judgment that Nellie Cohen's angina attacks and subsequent death were the direct result of her emotional response to learning of the death of her son Ira.

                California resident, and Ira, who was an Illinois resident.  On May 25, 1979, Ira Cohen was killed in an airplane crash that occurred near Chicago, Illinois, during a flight that was en route from Chicago to Los Angeles, California. 2  The airplane which crashed was operated by the defendant, American Airlines, and manufactured by the defendant, McDonnell Douglas
                

The defendant, American Airlines, is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in New York. 4 The defendant, McDonnell Douglas, is a Maryland corporation which has its principal place of business in Missouri. The plaintiff is the executor of the estate of Nellie Cohen, and is her only surviving heir and next of kin.

QUESTION ONE.

"What law would the courts of Massachusetts apply with respect to the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claim against McDonnell Douglas Corporation for breach of warranty?"

DISCUSSION

The plaintiff's breach of warranty claim is based on § 2-318 of the Uniform Commercial Code. G.L. c. 106, § 2-318. We have stated that "[c]onflict of law problems arising under the Uniform Commercial Code are resolved by the Code." Industrial Nat'l Bank v. Leo's Used Car Exch., Inc., 362 Mass. 797, 800, 291 N.E.2d 603 (1973). Section 1-105 of G.L. c. 106, provides that in the absence of an agreement between the parties as to which State's law shall govern, the provisions of the Massachusetts Uniform Commercial Code shall apply to "transactions bearing an appropriate relation to this state." There is no evidence that there was any agreement to the effect that a particular State's law should apply to the plaintiff's breach of warranty claim. Hence, resolution of the choice of law issue depends on the interpretation of the words "appropriate relation."

In cases where we have addressed whether a particular transaction bears an appropriate relation to this Commonwealth, we have not attempted a definition of these words. See Nevins v. Tinker, 384 Mass. 702, ---, Mass.Adv.Sh. (1981) 2335, 2338, 429 N.E.2d 332; Industrial Nat'l Bank v. Leo's Used Car Exch., Inc., supra; Skinner v. Tober Foreign Motors, Inc., 345 Mass. 429, 432, 187 N.E.2d 669 (1963). Courts in other jurisdictions have not adopted a uniform definition of these words. See Note, Conflicts of Laws and the "Appropriate Relation" Test of Section 1-105 of the Uniform Commercial Code, 40 Geo.Wash.L.Rev.

                797, 802-803 (1972).  In interpreting the words "appropriate relation" as used in § 1-105 of the Massachusetts Uniform Commercial Code, G.L. c. 106, § 1-105, we are guided by the Uniform Commercial Code Comment, which states that "[i]n deciding [what is an appropriate relation], the court is not strictly bound by precedents established in other contexts."   Although the Comment to the Code indicates that we are not strictly bound by established choice of law principles, we note that such principles are a useful starting point in determining whether the Commonwealth of Massachusetts bears an "appropriate relation" to a given transaction or occurrence.  Indeed, in this case, the plaintiff's breach of warranty claim reveals so many factual contacts with different States that it would be an extremely difficult task to resolve the choice of law issue without examining established doctrines.  From the record before us, we know [389 Mass. 332] that Nellie Cohen was a Massachusetts resident, that she learned of Ira Cohen's death while she was in Massachusetts, and that she suffered angina attacks and ultimately died in Massachusetts.  We also know that Ira Cohen was a resident of Illinois and that the airplane crash occurred in Illinois.  We further know that the plaintiff has at all times relevant to this action been a resident of California.  We are informed that McDonnell Douglas is a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business in Missouri, and that American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in New York. 5  It further appears that the plaintiff alleges that the conduct of McDonnell Douglas which caused the crash occurred in California where the airplane was manufactured and designed. 6  See In re Air Crash Disaster near Chicago, Ill. on May 25, 1979, 644 F.2d 594, 604 (7th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.  Lin v. American Airlines, Inc., 454 U.S. 878, 102 S.Ct. 358, 70 L.Ed.2d 187 (1981). 7
                

In light of these various factual contacts with different States, it is useful to examine established choice of law principles in resolving whether, in this case, Massachusetts bears an "appropriate relation" to the plaintiff's claim. We agree with the parties that since "a claim for breach of warranty of merchantability is in essence a tort claim," Wolfe v. Ford Motor Co., 386 Mass. 95, 99, 434 N.E.2d 1008 (1982), it is appropriate to view the choice of law issue raised by the plaintiff's claim in light of choice of law principles applicable in tort actions. See, e.g., Bilancia v. General Motors Corp., 538 F.2d 621, 623 (4th Cir.1976); Paoletto v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 464 F.2d 976, 980-981 (3d Cir.1972); Whitaker v. Harvell-Kilgore Corp., 418 F.2d 1010, 1016 n. 9 (5th Cir.1969); Uppgren v. Executive Aviation Servs., Inc., 326 F.Supp. 709, 716-717 (D.Md.1971); McCrossin v. Hicks Chevrolet, Inc., 248 A.2d 917 (D.C.App.1969).

The United States District Court judge in this case observed that the allegedly defective product (the airplane) was not physically present in this State, and that therefore it might be inappropriate to treat the plaintiff's breach of warranty claim as a negligence claim for purposes of applying choice of law principles. See Oresman v The law of Massachusetts is that ordinarily ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
79 cases
  • Anderson v. WR Grace & Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • February 21, 1986
    ...resulting from injuries to another. These are the requirements of physical proximity to the accident, Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327, 450 N.E.2d 581, 589-90 (1983), temporal proximity to the negligent act, Miles v. Edward O. Tabor, M.D., Inc., 387 Mass. 783, 443 N.E.2d 1302......
  • Lambert v. Kysar
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • May 7, 1992
    ...the issue, however, as the outcome is the same under the substantive law of either jurisdiction. See Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327, 332, 450 N.E.2d 581, 584 (1983) ("the usual first step in applying conflict of laws principles is to determine whether there is a conflict am......
  • Chambers v. Dakotah Charter, Inc.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • June 3, 1992
    ...(Ind.1987); Fuerste v. Bemis, 156 N.W.2d 831 (Iowa 1968); Adams v. Buffalo Forge Co., 443 A.2d 932 (Me.1982); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp, 389 Mass. 327, 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983); Mitchell v. Craft, 211 So.2d 509 (Miss.1968); Kennedy v. Dixon, 439 S.W.2d 173 (Mo.1969); Harper v. Silva, 224......
  • Thomas v. Town of Chelmsford, Civil Action No. 16–11689–PBS
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • July 25, 2017
    ...injured body until twenty-four hours after an accident at funeral home was not entitled to recover); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327, 450 N.E.2d 581, 589–90 (1983) (holding that mother who did not learn of her son's death in airplane crash until seven hours after the crash c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chapter § 2.05 PHYSICAL INJURIES
    • United States
    • Full Court Press Travel Law
    • Invalid date
    ...(Fla. Sup. 1989) (wrongful death; investment income; future inflationary effects). Massachusetts: Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327, 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (no pain and suffering for family members). Oregon: Andor v. United Air Lines, Inc., 20 Aviation Cases 17,207 (Or. App. 19......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT