DiFiore v. American Airlines, Inc.
646 F.3d 81
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- In 2005 American began charging curbside check-in fees of $2 per bag at Logan Airport; tips declined as a result; skycaps largely relied on tips for income.
- Plaintiffs, Logan skycaps, sue American and G2 Secure Staff alleging the fee reclassified as a service charge and violated Massachusetts tips statute Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 152A.
- Mass. statute prohibits employers from demanding or accepting tips or service charges from patrons; skycaps qualify as service employees under § 152A(a).
- American moved to dismiss or for summary judgment arguing federal preemption under 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(1); district court denied some aspects and later granted summary judgment on others.
- Jury awarded skycaps damages for the tips-law claim and related claims; district court awarded trebled damages under § 150 but court later remitted, and post-trial motions addressed preemption and damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Massachusetts tips statute conflict with federal preemption? | DiFiore argues the statute is preempted by § 41713(b)(1). | American contends state law is preempted as it relates to airline prices/services. | Yes; the statute is preempted as applied. |
| Whether the tips statute is 'related to a price, route, or service' for preemption purposes. | Skycaps contend the statute directly affects price/service of curbside baggage. | American argues the statute is not sufficiently connected to price/service. | The statute is preempted; it directly regulates service and price aspects of curbside baggage. |
| Does Rowe/Morales/Wolens framework control the preemption outcome here? | Preemption should be limited; state constraints are tenuous. | Preemption should be broad under Rowe/Morales/Wolens. | Massachusetts tips law is preempted under the Rowe/Morales/Wolens framework as applied. |
| Did the jury's damages reasoning rely on the tips statute, affecting preemption outcome? | Damages based on the tips statute support non-preempted theories. | Damages based on tips statute reflect preempted state regulation. | Court reversed judgment; remanded for entry of judgment in favor of American. |
Key Cases Cited
- Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374 (1992) (broad preemption language; price/service regulation emphasis)
- American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219 (1995) (preemption of state laws governing airline practices and consumer protections)
- Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transp. Ass'n, 552 U.S. 364 (2008) (expansive interpretation of 'service' under preemption clause; 'related to'" standard)
- Air Transp. Ass'n of Am. v. Cuomo, 520 F.3d 218 (2d Cir. 2008) (definition of 'service' for preemption in the circuit)