AVIATECA, S.A., FORMERLY KNOWN AS EMPRESA GUATEMALTECA DE AVIACION, PETITIONER,
v.
THE HONORABLE RONALD M. FRIEDMAN, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted a writ of prohibition preventing a Florida trial court from exercising jurisdiction over wrongful death cases against a Guatemalan airline, holding that Article 28 of the Warsaw Convention limits jurisdiction to four specific locations, none of which were present here.
A trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over wrongful death cases arising from international air travel when none of the four mandatory forums specified in Article 28(1) of the Warsaw Convention are present.
[1] Article 28(1) of the Warsaw Convention establishes four mandatory forums for actions arising from international air travel, and a court lacking all four locations has no…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAviateca, a Guatemalan airline, was sued in Florida state court in nine wrongful death cases arising from international air travel. Aviateca's domicil…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Warsaw Convention cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Aviateca, S.A. [Aviateca] petitions this court for a writ of prohibition to prevent the Honorable Ronald M. Friedman from presiding over nine wrongful death cases brought against Aviateca. Specifically, Aviateca alleges that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Article 28 of the Warsaw Convention. We grant the petition.
Article 28(1) of the Warsaw Convention provides that an action for damages arising out of international air travel must be brought in one of four places: 1) the domicile of the carrier; 2) the principal place of business of the carrier; 3) the carrier’s place of business through which the contract of carriage was made; or 4) the place of destination. Sopcak v. Northern Mountain Helicopter Serv., 52 F. 3d 817 (9th Cir.1995); Kapar v. Kuwait Airways Corp., 845 F. 2d 1100 (D.C.Cir.1988); Smith v. Canadian Pac. Airways, Ltd., 452 F. 2d 798 (2d Cir.1971); Cortes v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 638 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). In applying Article 28(1), it is clear that the trial court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over these nine wrongful death cases. First, Aviateca’s domicile is not in the United States. Second, Aviateca’s principal place of business is not in the United States. Third, the place of business through which each contract was made was not in the United States. Finally, the place of destination was not in the United States. Therefore, since the United States is not one of the four mandatory fora set forth in Article 28 of the Warsaw Convention, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition.
Petition granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Smith v. Canadian Pac. Airways, Ltd., 452 F.2d 798 (2d Cir. 1971)
- Kapar v. Kuwait Airways Corp., 845 F.2d 1100 (D.C. Cir. 1988)
- Cortes v. DELTA AIR Lines, Inc., 638 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)