Upton v. Iran Nat. Airlines Corp., 75 Civ. 6084 (CMM).

Citation450 F. Supp. 176
Decision Date05 May 1978
Docket NumberNo. 75 Civ. 6084 (CMM).,75 Civ. 6084 (CMM).
PartiesMargie L. UPTON, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Larry L. Upton, Deceased, etc., and Jerrie Nimtz and Judy Nimtz, Individually, and Rita Mae Glantz, as Administratrix of the Estate of Michael John Nimtz, Deceased, and Alfred E. Caswell, Plaintiffs, v. IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

Kreindler & Kreindler, New York City, for plaintiffs; Alan J. Konigsberg, James D. Veach, New York City, of counsel.

Condon & Forsyth, New York City, for defendant; George N. Tompkins, Jr., Desmond T. Barry, Jr., New York City, of counsel.

METZNER, District Judge:

This is an action for wrongful death and for personal injuries sustained when the roof of the main terminal at Mehrabad International Airport, Teheran, Iran, collapsed on December 5, 1974.

Defendant moves pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 56 for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability on plaintiffs' Second and Sixth Claims. Plaintiffs Upton and Caswell cross-move for partial summary judgment on those claims.

The claims at issue are based upon the Warsaw Convention. Article 17 thereof provides:

"The carrier shall be liable for damage sustained in the event of the death or wounding of a passenger or any other bodily injury suffered by a passenger, if the accident which caused the damage so sustained took place on board the aircraft or in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking."

The Montreal Agreement, Agreement CAB 18900 (1966), which modified the Warsaw Convention, imposed strict liability for injuries described in Article 17 and established maximum recovery per passenger at $75,000.

At the time of the roof collapse, Larry Upton, plaintiff's decedent, and Alfred E. Caswell, plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs), were booked to travel from Teheran to Zurich on defendant's Flight # 725. Their tickets provided for "international transportation" as defined in Article 1(2) of the Warsaw Convention. Therefore, plaintiffs' right to recover against Iran National Airlines is governed exclusively by the Warsaw Convention. Art. 24.

Defendant does not dispute that the roof collapse constituted an accident within the definition of Article 17. The only issue before the court is whether, under the facts of this case, plaintiffs were "in the course of any of the operations of embarking" within the meaning of Article 17. The interpretation of a treaty presents a question of law which is appropriately considered upon a motion for summary judgment. Day v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 393 F.Supp. 217, 220 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 528 F.2d 31 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 890, 97 S.Ct. 246, 50 L.Ed.2d 172 (1976) (hereinafter Day I).

Taking into account the steps required by the airline to complete embarkation, the test for liability is based upon three elements: "activity (what the plaintiffs were doing), control (at whose direction), and location." Day v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 528 F.2d 31, 33 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 890, 97 S.Ct. 246, 50 L.Ed.2d 172 (1976) (Day II).

The affidavits show that plaintiffs arrived at the airport at approximately 10:00 A.M. to board their flight scheduled for departure at noon. They presented their tickets at the Iran Airlines portion of the ticket counter in the terminal and received boarding passes and baggage checks.

At that point, plaintiffs were advised that the flight would be delayed due to inclement weather. They moved...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Kalantar v. Lufthansa German Airlines
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • April 10, 2003
    ...while riding escalator in public area, headed to passport control, were not embarking at time of injuries); Upton v. Iran Nat'l Airlines, Corp., 450 F.Supp. 176 (S.D.N.Y. 1978) (plaintiffs waiting in public area for their delayed flight were not embarking at time of roof collapse that cause......
  • Beaudet v. British Airways, PLC, 93-C-381.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • May 10, 1994
    ...that Article 17 did not govern passenger injured on elevator in public area while proceeding to his gate); Upton v. Iran Nat'l Airlines, Corp., 450 F.Supp. 176 (S.D.N.Y.1978) (holding that Article 17 did not govern passenger injured under the collapse of a roof after being directed to wait ......
  • Kalantar v. Lufthansa German Airlines, Civil Action 01cv00644 (HHK) (D. D.C. 8/7/2003)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • August 7, 2003
    ...while riding escalator in public area, headed to passport control, were not embarking at time of injuries); Upton v. Iran Nat'l Airlines Corp., 450 F. Supp. 176 (S.D.N.Y. 1978) (plaintiffs waiting in public area for their delayed flight were not embarking at time of roof collapse that cause......
  • Rabinowitz v. Scandinavian Airlines
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • July 3, 1990
    ...aff'd, 528 F.2d 31, 33 (2d Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 890, 97 S.Ct. 246, 50 L.Ed.2d 172 (1976); Upton v. Iran National Airlines Corp., 450 F.Supp. 176, 177 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff'd without opinion, 603 F.2d 215 (2d Cir. This language of Article 17 has been oft discussed and the scope of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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