Machiavellian said:
Actually once security comes in and you refuse to leave a place that has asked you to leave, they can remove you by force. People are forgetting that there is two actions going on here. United has the right to refuse any passenger passage on any plane. Security has the right to remove a passenger who refuse to leave a plane. If the passenger resist which is exactly what this guy did and he was hurt as a result, then courts can look at how he was hurt. You do not have to be a security risk, violent or anything like that. You only have to refuse to leave. This would be the same if you went into any building and they asked you to leave and you refused to go. The police has the right to remove you by force. If you resist then any injury occurred can be placed on you and if you resist and the police officer was hurt, you could be charged a felony. This has nothing to do with United fare rules or anything like that because those things can be disputed and they can be sue for breach of contract. The fact that comes into play is that the man was asked to leave and United does have that right. By refusing to leave he then put himself into tresspassing. Now once security comes on the scene they can remove any one who is tresspassing and can use force. The guy will get something from United but it will be settled out of court and it will not be anywhere close to a million. Hell it probably would not be more than 5K. |
No they do not. That is the point. That is breach of contract right there. He was not tresspassing, he had a valid contract with United Airlines and did not violate any of their rules or otherwise behave in a way that would allow them to remove him, until AFTER they started harrassing him. They were out of line.
If I had a contract that said I was allowed in the building against a monetary exchance (aka renting), no, no one has the right to 'remove' me. Not as long as I'm not violating the house rules or the law. That is why contracts exist. See a pattern here?