Dazo
Dazo v. Globe Airport Security Services
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Tashima, J.
ORDER
The petition for panel rehearing is granted. The opinions filed October 11, 2001, slip op. 14341, and reported at 268 F.3d 671 , are withdrawn, and the opinions filed concurrently with this order are substituted in their place.
OPINION
We address the reach of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Transportation by Air, Oct. 12, 1929, 49 Stat. 3000 , T.S. No. 876 (1934), reprinted in note following 49 U.S.C. § 40105 (the “Warsaw Convention” or the “Convention”), which applies to international, not domestic, air transportation. We hold that the Warsaw Convention does not apply to an airport security company rendering services to both international and domestic air passengers; nor does it apply to airlines that did not provide international air carriage to the plaintiff. We therefore reverse the judgment of the district court.
I
On May 12, 1999, Ester Dazo entered Terminal C of the San Jose International Aii-port, where she intended to board an 11:50 am. flight to Toronto, connecting in St. Louis. To enter the secured area of the terminal, persons must pass through a security checkpoint, where they are examined by metal detectors and…
Concurrence in Part
Scannlain, J.
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the court’s affirmance of Dazo’s wilful misconduct claim, but I must respectfully dissent from its holding that Globe, as agent of TWA, is not entitled to the protection of the Warsaw Convention.
At the time of Dazo’s flight, airlines were charged by federal statute with the responsibility to screen all passengers and property. See 49 U.S.C. § 44901 (2000). 1 *942 TWA, which provided Dazo carriage to Toronto, delegated its screening responsibility to Globe. 2 Thus, Dazo concedes, as she must, that Globe acted as TWA’s agent when she passed through the security checkpoint. The Warsaw Convention extends to an airline’s agents and employees, a premise not challenged by the majority. See, e.g., Reed v. Wiser, 555 F.2d 1079, 1089-92 (2d Cir.1977); Kabbani v. Int’l Total Servs., 805 F.Supp. 1033, 1039-40 (D.D.C.1992); In re Air Disaster at Lockerbie, Scotland on Dec. 21, 1988, 776 F.Supp. 710, 712-14 (E.D.N.Y.1991); Baker v. Lansdell Protective Agency, Inc., 590 F.Supp. 165, 170-71 (S.D.N.Y.1984). Hence, to the extent that Globe acts as agent of TWA, it must be afforded the protection of the Warsaw Convention. See, e.g., In re Air…