Legal Notices

Michael J. Gregorek, Esq.

Home Page

The Upper East Cider™
This apple-a-day will keep the spin doctor away.
An Interactive Multimedia Publication.	July 4, 2000	Produced on an Apple from the Big Apple.

This Edition: Animals Are Just Another Bag, Again $15,000 Judgment and Appeal for Reforms Safe Air Travel for Animals Act Four Special Sections: Purr-adise™ We are the beasts and these are truly God's children. Mitchell-Lama Suit Follow the suit here. Push the Button™ These are issues in the news. Sometimes we are owed a courtesy flush. Do Your Job™ When you love your job so much that you are afraid to lose it, that is the day you stop doing your job. Some of these issues point out where politicians, who are too busy holding onto their jobs to do their jobs, need to realize their fears.	Animals Are Just Another Bag, Again. Six years ago, I accepted a case representing a dog and his human companion against a major airline for virtually baking the dog to death. The airline argued the dog was just another bag. I held up the airline's baggage claim form and asked them to circle the dog. They got the point and a judgment was entered in federal court for the highest amount ever sustained for a dog. For half a decade since then, I have monitored the improved treatment of traveling animals by the airlines, even when it was just refusing them service because conditions were clearly unsafe, e.g.: Airlines ban pets as baggage because of relentless heat and Airlines banning pets as baggage because of relentless heat. Recently I saw in the news a report that the government had separated animals from the "baggage" category, creating a separate form and monetary limit for traveling animals. Congress is making it the law, raising the maximum amount an airline must pay for killing an animal from the baggage limitation of $1,250 to a new animal limitation of $2,500. See New Law To Make Pet Travel Safer and Officials Seek Pets' Airline Rights. The airlines publicly oppose this new law which they claim will kill their bottom line (see, e.g.,To Fly or Not to Fly with Pets), but I believe they suckered the proponents of this weak law. I obtained $15,000 for the loss of the dog's life. These recent developments will circumvent the precedent of my case and once again make losing a (non-human) passenger economically viable, hence, not a priority for the airlines when they decide between profits and compassion. The label baggage may have been peeled back some from animals but so was the deterrent to treating animals like baggage--12,500 reasons.	Past Editions: If there is a gap between the date of this issue and the current date, then clicking on this link to the current edition will fill in that gap with a list of all the editions to date, if any, for you to review, below. June 24, 2000: Premiere Issue
	Safe Air Travel for Animals Act The proposed law, which is making its way through the House (H.R. 2776) and Senate (S. 1193), does have some of the reforms that I called for on May 1, 1995, which are well-intentioned and helpful. What the proposed law will do is have the airlies: (1) take note of the fact that animals are not ordinary baggage; (2) take certain common sense precautions to avoid injuring or killing extraordinary baggage; (3) unmask the statistical information regarding the number of abuses; and (4) pay twice their ordinary baggage limitation when they lose extraordinary baggage.
	Congress's proposed findings are that: (1) animals are live, sentient creatures, with the ability to feel pain and suffer; (2) it is inappropriate for animals transported by air to be treated as baggage; (3) according to the Air Transport Association, over 500,000 animals are transported by air each year and as many as 5,000 of those animals are lost, injured, or killed; (4) most injuries to animals traveling by airplane are due to mishandling by baggage personnel, severe temperature fluctuations, insufficient oxygen in cargo holds, or damage to kennels; (5) there are no Federal requirements that airlines report incidents of animal loss, injury, or death; (6) members of the public have no information to use in choosing an airline based on its record of safety with regard to transporting animals; (7) the last congressional action on animals transported by air was conducted over 22 years ago; and (8) the conditions of cargo holds of airplanes must be improved to protect the health, and ensure the safety, of transported animals.
	Bottom line: The proposed law elevates animals to extraordinary baggage requiring special handling. (I say extraordinary baggage because the value of the animal is set in terms using the limitation for damage to or loss of ordinary baggage.) The new liability limit of "not less than 2 times any limitation established by the carrier for loss or damage to baggage" (i.e., $1,250 to $2,500) removes the threat to the airlines of anyone copying my judgment ($15,000). But baggage is baggage. Jewelry, cameras, bermuda shorts and animals are all evenly lost, damaged and loaded on the wrong flights. When it comes to cutting corners, baggage, even extraordinary baggage, will suffer.

© 2000 Michael J. Gregorek, Esq.

Back to Top