578 F. App'x 51
2d Cir.2014Background
- Kruger plaintiffs appeal from a district court summary judgment in Virgin Atlantic’s favor and denial of reconsideration.
- The district court held there were no genuine issues of material fact and Virgin was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- Key issues: EU Regulation 261/2004 recovery for a cancelled flight, and Montreal Convention implications for tort claims, plus contract breach allegations.
- The court applied de novo review to the district court’s summary judgment ruling and standard for reconsideration.
- The court ultimately affirmed the district court’s December 23, 2013 judgment, and thus denied relief to the Krugers.
- The Krugers’ notice of appeal challenged the reconsideration order, but the panel concluded it had jurisdiction to review both the underlying summary judgment and the reconsideration decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU261/2004 recovery for a cancelled flight | Krugers seek compensation under EU261/2004 for the cancellation | Virgin disputes entitlement or amount under EU261/2004 | Affirmed judgment; no genuine issue for EU261/2004 recovery |
| Montreal Convention precludes tort claims for false arrest | Krugers rely on tort theories for false arrest | Montreal Convention bars these tort claims | Affirmed judgment; Montreal Convention bars the claims |
| Breach of contract by Virgin | Krugers allege contractual breach by Virgin | Virgin contends no breach or no damages under contract | Affirmed judgment; contract breach claim rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, 321 F.3d 292 (2d Cir. 2003) (summary judgment standard; de novo review and inferences)
- Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 2003) (ambiguities resolved in movant's favor on summary judgment)
- Johnson v. Univ. of Rochester Med. Ctr., 642 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard for reconsideration)
- Shrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 1995) (grounds for reconsideration; relitigation prohibition)
- R Best Produce, Inc. v. DiSapio, 540 F.3d 115 (2d Cir. 2008) (notice of appeal from denial of motion to reconsider permits review of underlying order)