Hacker News Reader

Comment by wnevets | Hacker News Reader

>The contract allows the airline to deny boarding involuntarily in case of overbooking. But that’s not what happened; the airplane wasn’t oversold. And Dao wasn’t denied boarding.

Every article about this story needs to repeat this line.

View on HN

The article also goes on to say (in essence) that even if you assume that United was in the wrong on this point, it constitutes a breach of contract on United's part. At that point, Dao is free to sue for breach of contract...but United is free to ask him to leave.

I'm not justifying United's actions (or that of the police)...just saying that Dao unfortunately probably wouldn't have a legal argument against being asked to leave.

I don't think that is true. If you had a valid lease with a landlord for your apartment, your landlord can't just kick you out of your apartment before the end of the lease if you haven't violated any of the contractual terms of the lease.

We have renter protection laws because people used to do just that.

That is because tenancy has a depth of laws surrounding them. The only way to kick a tenant out of his house if with an order from the Court and action by the sheriff (at least in most states). But your right to stay on the property of another person, outside of tenancy arrangements, do not have that body of law.

You are absolutely correct that a whole host of laws govern the landlord-tenant relationship. Given how regulated air travel is, as well as United's status as a common carrier, I wouldn't be surprised that there are also similarly restrictive laws for air travel, so I still question whether Dr. Dao did have a duty to vacate his seat despite the breach of contract by United.

The actual lawyer who wrote this article believes Dao did have a duty to vacate, so I think that's a bit more authoritative than our layperson opinions here. Of course, only a court could really answer that question, and I'm sure United will try hard to settle this out of court.

Airplanes also have a depth of laws surrounding them.

Landlords are restricted from breaking lease agreements by Tenants Rights laws. There may not be an equivalent set of laws or regulations that restrict airlines from breaking their contract of carriage with a passenger.

Dao may not have a legal argument to defend his refusal to leave after being asked to, but he almost certainly has grounds to sue for breach of contract just for being asked to leave.

Boarding isn't defined in the contract of carriage.

Most airline employees to use it as meaning until the doors are locked

Just read another article where the author said that if the word or term is not defined in the contract then the basic meaning is what's used. So what most airline employees think it means is irrelavent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com