Eric Murdock United Airlines Federal Lawsuit Documents

Case 1:18-cv-06741-KAM-SMG Document 1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 1
LAW OFFICE OF GARY PORT PC

d/b/a PORT and SAVA
303 Merrick Road, Suite 212
Lynbrook, New York 11563
GARY PORT, ESQ.
(516) 352-2999
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
ERIC MURDOCK and BRENDA WILLIAMS Docket # 18 cv 06741
Plaintiffs COMPLAINT
And DEMAND FOR TRIAL
By JURY
-against-
UNITED AIRLINES, INC, and JANE DOE, an unidentified

Employee of the Defendant United Airlines, Inc.
Defendants
------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
The Plaintiffs ERIC MURDOCK and BRENDA WILLIAMS, complaining of the Defendants,
alleges as follows:
Introduction and Summary

1. This suit is brought to redress the racial discrimination and wrongful profiling of peaceful
African-American passengers by United Airlines. On Friday, July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff
were passengers on United Flight 1537 from Las Vegas to Newark. On said flight the
Plaintiffs were discriminated against, harassed, and humiliated by one of Defendant’s
flight attendants, an unidentified woman referred to as “JANE DOE.”
2. Plaintiffs were then unjustifiably removed from the flight in front of the other
passengers, despite the fact that they posed no security risk and committed no wrongful
1
acts. Plaintiffs were removed from the flight at the insistence of the Defendant JANE
DOE whose unprofessional conduct caused discomfort for the passengers around her.
Plaintiffs were not arrested, as they had done nothing illegal.
3. The Plaintiff ERIC MURDOCK (“Murdock”), an African-American man, is a retired
National Basketball Association player, who as a point guard played for the Utah Jazz,
Milwaukee Bucks, Denver Nuggets, Miami Heat, New Jersey Nets, and the Los Angeles
Clippers. He held, until 2002 the NCAA records for most steals, 376, and a Big East
Conference record for most points, 435. In his NBA career, Murdock played in 508
games and scored a total of 5,118 points. He is a resident of State of New Jersey.
4. The Plaintiff Brenda Williams (“Williams”), an African-American woman is a resident of
New Jersey.
5. Defendant United Airlines, Inc. (“United”) is a major American airline headquartered in
Chicago, Illinois. Defendant is incorporated in Delaware. It conducts business in New
York and is listed on the New York Stock exchange. The Defendant operates at John F.
Kennedy Airport, in Queens, New York at terminals 1, 4, 5 and 7, and from LaGuardia
Airport, in Queens, New York, at Terminal B.
6. Defendant JANE DOE is a Caucasian unidentified female flight attendant who works for
the Defendant United and was working on United Flight 1537 from Las Vegas to Newark
on July 13, 2018.
7. This lawsuit challenges the discriminatory and unjustified removal of United States
citizens from a United Airlines flight, in violation of the laws of the United States. This
case is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981. This Court has jurisdiction over this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, and 1367.
2
8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant is an airline that
regularly does business in Queens County, New York, in the Eastern District of New
York.
9. Venue is proper in the Eastern District of New York under 28 U.S.C.§ 1391 because
Defendant United does substantial business in this district as it operates out of two
airports and five terminals.
FACTS
10. In July 2018, the Plaintiff Murdock had attended a conference hosted by the National
Basketball Retired Players Association in Las Vegas, Nevada.
11. In July 2018, the Plaintiff Williams had attended a conference hosted by her employer in
Las Vegas, Nevada.
12. On July 13, 2018, the Plaintiffs Murdock and Williams were ticketed passengers on
United Flight 1537 from Las Vegas, Nevada to Newark, New Jersey and were properly
seated in the plane. Plaintiffs were strangers to each other and met due to the assignment
of adjacent seats.
13. Plaintiff Murdock was assigned seat 15-E and his son was assigned seat 36-H.
14. Prior to take-off Plaintiff Murdock noted that the row behind his seat was empty. This
row contained the emergency exit.
15. Plaintiff Murdock asked a female flight attendant, herein after “Jane Roe”, if he and his
son could sit together in the emergency exit row. Roe assented if no ticketed passenger
would be sitting there.
3
16. Roe did inform Plaintiff Murdock that there was a premium price for the seats, which
Plaintiff Murdock offered to pay. Roe informed him that he’d have to pay at the counter
outside, but as the cabin door had been closed, that option was rendered impossible.
17. Just prior to take off, a ticketed passenger did appear and had seat in the emergency exit
row.
18. The ticketed passenger upon hearing that Plaintiff Murdock, who is over 6 feet tall, and
his son wished to sit together in this emergency exit row graciously offered up his seat.
19. Plaintiff Murdock accepted the offer of the other passenger and moved from his center
row seat to the emergency exit row. The other passenger moved to another seat. Such
move was made with the approval of the unidentified flight attendant, Jane Roe.
20. Shortly before takeoff, Defendant JANE DOE, a flight attendant acting for and as an
agent of the Defendant United demanded that Plaintiff Murdock return to his ticketed
seat.
21. Defendant JANE DOE stated that the seats in the emergency row carried a premium
price. When Plaintiff Murdock requested the price, Doe was unable to tell him. She later
told him the price but was unable to tell him how to pay.
22. Defendant JANE DOE was also informed that the ticketed passenger for the emergency
row had swapped his seat with Plaintiff Murdock. Defendant JANE DOE refused to be
swayed by the fact that the passenger ticketed for the seat voluntarily switched with the
Plaintiff Murdock and demanded that he return to his ticketed seat.
23. Defendant JANE DOE also told Plaintiff Murdock that the emergency row had to remain
clear and unoccupied.
4
24. During the exchange Defendant JANE DOE was rude and dismissive of Plaintiff
Murdock.
25. Plaintiff Murdock ultimately complied and returned to his ticketed seat as did his son.
26. Approximately a half an hour into the flight, a Caucasian female moved into a seat in the
emergency exit row.
27. Defendant JANE DOE did not cause the Caucasian female to return to her ticketed seat.
Instead, DOE provided beverage service to the female.
28. Plaintiff Murdock then returned to the emergency exit row.
29. Defendant JANE DOE then told Plaintiff Murdock to go back to his seat.
30. Plaintiff Murdock asked Defendant JANE DOE why she had allowed the Caucasian
woman to sit in the emergency row, and Defendant JANE DOE told him that it was none
of his business.
31. Plaintiff Williams had gone to the rest room when Plaintiff Murdock moved back to the
emergency exit row seat and was returning when she observed the Defendant JANE
DOE’s confrontation with Plaintiff Murdock.
32. Plaintiff Williams concerned about Defendant JANE DOE’s aggressive and disrespectful
attitude asked Doe as to why she was being rude to Plaintiff Murdock.
33. Defendant JANE DOE aggressively told Plaintiff Williams that it was none of her
business.
34. Defendant JANE DOE then began yelling at Plaintiff Williams and accusing Williams of
recording Defendant JANE DOE on her cellular telephone.
35. Though Plaintiff Williams was holding her phone she was not recording her.
5
36. Despite being repeatedly told by Plaintiff Williams that she was not recording her,
Defendant JANE DOE demanded, in a very hostile and aggressive manner that Plaintiff
Williams surrender the phone.
37. When Plaintiff Williams refused, Defendant JANE DOE extended her arm and leaned
into the row about half way across and demanded with a threatening and intimidating
voice, “erase the video now, or give me your phone! It’s against the law to record me!”
38. The actions of Defendant JANE DOE placed Plaintiff Williams in imminent fear of an
unwanted, offensive physical contact.
39. Plaintiff Williams repeatedly told Defendant JANE DOE that there was no recording.
Defendant JANE DOE however continued to yell at Plaintiff Williams and made as if to
grab the phone.
40. Defendant JANE DOE finally left without taking Plaintiff Williams’ phone.
41. Shortly thereafter, Jane Roe returned and asked Plaintiff Murdock if he would consent to
return to his seat.
42. While Roe was talking to Plaintiff Murdock, Defendant JANE DOE returned. She leaned
over and placing her head within inches of the Plaintiff Murdock and spoke. Plaintiff
Murdock told her to get out of his personal space.
43. The actions of Defendant JANE DOE placed Plaintiff Murdock in imminent fear of an
unwanted, offensive physical contact.
44. At the request of Jane Roe, Plaintiff Murdock returned to his seat.
45. Shortly thereafter during the beverage service, Defendant JANE DOE in a snide and
condescending tone asked Plaintiff Murdock if he wanted a beverage or if he was “going
to boycott?”
6
46. Plaintiff Murdock did not respond to the obvious race baiting but maintained a dignified
silence.
47. Neither Plaintiff had any further interaction with Defendant JANE DOE.
48. After the Plaintiff landed at Newark International Airport, the passengers were instructed
by the pilot to remain seated do to a security situation.
49. The Plaintiffs were then escorted off the plane first.
50. On this plane were various co-workers of the Plaintiff Williams as well and current and
former professional athletes. Further, the Plaintiff Murdock is celebrity athlete and has
been the subject of many local news stories in New Jersey.
51. When the Plaintiffs were led off the plane they were met by four armed members of the
Transportation Security Administration.
52. After being interviewed by the TSA, the Plaintiffs were not further detained and were
allowed to retrieve their luggage and leave the airport.
53. Plaintiff Williams suffered severe personal embarrassment and well as emotional trauma
from this event.
54. Plaintiff Murdock suffered severe personal and professional embarrassment from the
event.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION, AND/OR RETENTION OF
AN UNFIT EMPLOYEE
55. The Plaintiffs repeat and realleges the proceeding paragraphs as if set forth herein.
56. Plaintiffs are informed and believes and thereon alleges that in doing the acts as
heretofore alleged, Defendant, JANE DOE was incompetent and unfit to perform the
7
duties for which she was employed, and that an undue risk to persons such as plaintiffs
would exist because of the employment.
57. Plaintiffs are informed and believes and thereon alleges that in doing the acts as
heretofore alleged, Defendant United failed to adequately train and supervise Defendant
JANE DOE in the exercise of the tasks of her employment and/or failed to terminate her,
thereby proximately causing plaintiffs’ injuries as set forth heretofore.
58. Despite this advance knowledge of Defendant JANE DOE’s unfitness to perform her
duties, Defendant United retained JANE DOE as an employee in conscious disregard of
the rights and safety of others.
59. Defendant United is liable for the actions of its agents and employees directly and under
the doctrine of respondeat superior.
60. Defendant United is a Common Carrier. A Common Carrier must carry passengers
safely. Common carriers must use the highest care and the vigilance of a very cautious
person. They must do all that human care, vigilance, and foresight reasonably can do
under the circumstances to avoid harm to passengers. While a common carrier does not
guarantee the safety of its passengers, it must use reasonable skill to provide everything
necessary for safe transportation, in view of the transportation used and the practical
operation of the business. Defendants breached their duty of care in its actions toward
Plaintiff.
61. As a direct and proximate result Defendants actions, plaintiffs suffered mental distress,
anguish, personal and professional embarrassment and indignation. Plaintiffs are thereby
entitled to general and compensatory damage in an amount no less than ten million
dollars.
8
62. Defendants acts alleged herein are malicious, oppressive, despicable, and in conscious
disregard of Plaintiff’s rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against
Defendants in order to punish and make an example of each of them.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
ASSAULT AGAINST PLAINTIFF WILLIAMS
64. The Defendant JANE DOE, as an agent and employee of the Defendant United by
reaching and attempting to grab the cell phone held by the Plaintiff Williams placed
Plaintiff Williams in imminent apprehension and fear of unwanted bodily contact.
65. The actions of the Defendant JANE DOE in reaching and grabbing for the cell phone
were intentional and by reaching into the confined space of the airplane demonstrated and
will and ability to carry of the threat.
66. At no time did Plaintiff Williams consent to or in any way justify any of the acts of
Defendants.
68. Corporate Defendant is a Common Carrier. A Common Carrier must carry passengers
9
Plaintiff Williams.
69. As a direct and proximate result Defendants actions, Plaintiff Williams suffered mental
distress, anguish, and indignation. Plaintiff Williams is thereby entitled to general and
compensatory damage in an amount no less than $50,000.
disregard of Plaintiff Williams’ rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
ASSAULT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MURDOCK
72. The Defendant JANE DOE, as an agent and employee of the Defendant United by
leaning over and placing her face within inches of the Plaintiff Murdock while engaged in
disrespectful language placed Plaintiff Murdock in imminent apprehension and fear of
unwanted bodily contact.
73. The actions of the Defendant JANE DOE of leaning over and placing her face within
inches of the Plaintiff Murdock while engaged in disrespectful language into the confined
space of the airplane demonstrated and will and ability to carry of the threat.
74. At no time did Plaintiff Murdock consent to or in any way justify any of the acts of
Defendants.
10
Plaintiff Williams.
77. As a direct and proximate result Defendants actions, Plaintiff Murdock suffered mental
distress, anguish, and indignation. Plaintiff Murdock is thereby entitled to general and
compensatory damage in an amount no less than $50,000.
disregard of Plaintiff Murdock’ rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE
79. Plaintiffs repeat and realleges the preceding and subsequent paragraphs as though set
forth herein.
80. Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs by failing to provide a safe place for
its passengers to conduct their travel. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants’
breach of duty, Plaintiffs suffered and continues to suffer shock, humiliation,
embarrassment, trepidation, fright, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry, mortification,
11
indignity and extreme and enduring emotional distress, all to their damage in an amount
to be determined according to proof at trial.
Plaintiff.
83. As a direct and proximate result Defendants actions, Plaintiffs suffered mental distress,
anguish, and indignation. Plaintiffs are thereby entitled to general and compensatory
damage in an amount no less than ten million dollars.
disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
85. Plaintiffs repeat and realleges the preceding and subsequent paragraphs as though set
forth herein.
12
86. Defendants engaged in outrageous conduct which was intentional and malicious and done
for the purpose of causing Plaintiff to suffer humiliation. As a direct and proximate cause
of Defendants’ outrageous conduct, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer shock,
humiliation, embarrassment, trepidation, fright, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry,
mortification, indignity and extreme and enduring emotional distress, all to their damage
in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial.
Plaintiff.
89. As a direct and proximate result Defendants outrageous actions, Plaintiffs suffered mental
distress, anguish, and indignation. Plaintiffs are thereby entitled to general and
compensatory damage in an amount no less than ten million dollars.
defendants in order to punish and make an example of each of them.
13
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
DISCRIMINATION UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1981
91. Plaintiff repeat and realleges the preceding and subsequent paragraphs as though set forth
herein.
92. At all times relevant to the events described above, Defendant JANE DOE on Friday,
July 13, 2018 was an employee and/or agent of Defendant United. The discriminatory
practices described above were carried out: (a) at the direction of and with the consent,
encouragement, knowledge, and ratification of the Defendant United; (b) under the
Defendant United’s authority, control, and supervision; and/or (c) within the scope of the
employee’ employment.
94. Defendant JANE DONE and by extension, Defendant United engaged in intentional
discrimination based on Plaintiffs’ race, color and ancestry, by assaulting Plaintiffs and
by their hostile treatment of Plaintiffs on Corporate Defendant’s July 13, 2018 flight. In
so doing, Defendants discriminated against Plaintiffs in the making and enforcement of
their contract with Defendants, namely the ticket they purchased to travel Defendant
United’s July 13, 2018 flight from Las Vegas, Nevada, to Newark, New Jersey.
95. The foregoing actions by the Defendants thus constitute a deprivation of plaintiffs’ right
to make and enforce contracts regardless of their race, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
96. As a direct, foreseeable, and proximate result of Defendant’s discrimination and wrongful
acts, Plaintiffs suffered and continues to suffer fear, anxiety, humiliation, mental pain and
14
anguish, emotional distress, inconvenience, and economic loss. The Plaintiffs were
injured on an amount no less than ten million dollars.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1964
98. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation set forth above as though
fully set forth herein.
99. The pilot and Defendant JANE DOE on United Airlines United Flight 1537 from Las
Vegas to Newark on July 13, 2018, were at all relevant times agents and/or
employees of Defendant United and were acting within the course and scope of their
employment.
100. Defendant United is liable for the unlawful acts of its agents and employees
directly and/or under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
101. Defendant United is the recipient of federal funds and is thus covered by Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d). Title VI and its implementing
regulations prohibit recipients of federal monies from discriminating on the basis of,
inter alia, race, color, or national origin.
102. Defendant JANE DOE’s actions during the flight to include arranging for the
Plaintiffs to be made a public spectacle by having them escorted off of the plane as
security risks and to be detained by the TSA were based upon the Plaintiffs race,
15
color, and/or national origin thus discriminated against the Plaintiffs in violation of
Title VI and its implementing regulations. Defendants actions were intentional and
done in violation of Plaintiffs’ civil rights.
103. As a direct, foreseeable, and proximate result of Defendant’s discrimination and
wrongful acts, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer fear, anxiety, humiliation, mental
pain and anguish, emotional distress, inconvenience, and economic loss. The Plaintiffs
were injured on an amount no less than ten million dollars.
104. Defendants acts alleged herein are malicious, oppressive, despicable, and in
conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FALSE IMPRISONMENT OF THE PLAINTIFFS
105. The pilot and Defendant JANE DOE on United Airlines United Flight 1537
from Las Vegas to Newark on July 13, 2018, were at all relevant times agents and/or
employees of Defendant United and were acting within the course and scope of their
employment.
106. Defendant United is liable for the unlawful acts of its agents and employees
directly and/or under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
107. Defendants intentionally and willfully deprived Plaintiffs of their freedom of
movement by removing Plaintiff from United Airlines United Flight 1537 on July 13,
2018, by identifying them as security risks to the plane and other passengers.
16
108. The Defendants caused the Plaintiffs to be detained by employees of the
Defendant and by armed members of the TSA.
109. The restraint, confinement, and detention compelled Plaintiffs to remain in the
airport for an appreciable amount of time.
110. Plaintiffs did not knowingly or voluntarily consent to such restraint,
confinement, and detainment.
111. Plaintiffs were emotionally harmed by such restraint, confinement, and
detainment and embarrassed before the public.
112. Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs harm. The
Plaintiffs were injured on an amount no less than ten million dollars.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS UPON THE PLAINTIFFS
114. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation set forth above as
though fully set forth herein.
115. Defendant and its employees and agents acted negligently and/or recklessly
when they removed Plaintiffs from United Airlines United Flight 1537.
116. Defendant and its employees and agents should have known that their
discriminatory treatment and confinement of Plaintiffs would create an unreasonable
risk of emotional and physical damages.
17
117. As a result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiffs have suffered serious emotional
distress, including suffering anguish, fright, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry, shock,
humiliation, and shame, all of which an ordinary reasonable person would be unable
to cope.
118. Defendant’s negligence was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs’ serious
emotional distress. The Plaintiffs were injured on an amount no less than ten million
dollars.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF CONTRACT
120. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation set forth above as
though fully set forth herein.
121. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a contract of carriage.
122. Plaintiff performed all conditions, covenants, and promises required on his part to
be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract.
123. Defendant breached the contract by removing the Plaintiffs from United Airlines
United Flight 1537 and failing to provide safe transport.
70. As a proximate result of Defendant’s breach, Plaintiffs have suffered
damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
18
Prayer for Relief
Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
A. For a declaratory judgment that the actions of Defendant described above
constituted discrimination on the basis of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981;
B. Permanently enjoining Defendant and its directors, officers, agents, and
employees to take all affirmative steps necessary to remedy the effects of the illegal,
discriminatory conduct described herein and to prevent similar occurrences in the future;
C. Awarding Plaintiff their expenses, costs, fees, and other disbursements associated
with the filing and maintenance of this action, including reasonable attorneys’ fees
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1988, and any other applicable provision of law;
D. For compensatory damages in an amount not less than ten million dollars;
E. For statutory damages;
F. For punitive damages; and
G. For such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, by signing below, I certify to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief that this complaint: (1) is not being presented for an
improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the
cost of litigation; (2) is supported by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for
extending, modifying, or reversing existing law; (3) the factual contentions have
evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support
after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and (4) the
complaint otherwise complies with the requirements of Rule 11.
19
Dated: November 27, 2018
____________________________
Gary Port, Esq.
Port and Sava
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
(516) 352-2999
Gary@portandsava.com
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
The Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury for all issues for triable.
Dated: November 27, 2018
____________________________
Gary Port, Esq.
Port and Sava
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
(516) 352-2999
Gary@portandsava.com
20
Case 1:18-cv-06741-KAM-SMG Document 1-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 21
JS 44 (Rev. 11/15) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

ERIC MURDOCK and BRENDA WILLIAMS United Airlines, INC. and Jane Doe, an unidentified Employee of the
Defendant United Airlines Inc
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Somerset County, NJ County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Queens, New York
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Port and Sava
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4
of Business In This State
’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act
’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability ’ 367 Health Care/ ’ 400 State Reapportionment
’ 150 Recovery of Overpayment ’ 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS ’ 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury ’ 820 Copyrights ’ 430 Banks and Banking
’ 151 Medicare Act ’ 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability ’ 830 Patent ’ 450 Commerce
’ 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability ’ 368 Asbestos Personal ’ 840 Trademark ’ 460 Deportation
Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY Corrupt Organizations
’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV
’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/
’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI Exchange
’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions
’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 891 Agricultural Acts
’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act ’ 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation ’ 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff ’ 896 Arbitration
’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) ’ 899 Administrative Procedure
’ 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ’ 442 Employment ’ 510 Motions to Vacate ’ 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
’ 240 Torts to Land ’ 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
’ 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations ’ 530 General ’ 950 Constitutionality of
’ 290 All Other Real Property ’ 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: ’ 462 Naturalization Application
’ 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 540 Mandamus & Other ’ 465 Other Immigration
Other ’ 550 Civil Rights Actions
’ 448 Education ’ 555 Prison Condition
’ 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
’ 1 Original ’ 2 Removed from ’ 3 Remanded from ’ 4 Reinstated or ’ 5 Transferred from ’ 6 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation
(specify)
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
42 USC 1981, 28 USC 1331, 1343 and 1367
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Violation of Civil Rights
VII. REQUESTED IN ’ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. 10,000,000.00 JURY DEMAND: ’ Yes ’ No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
11/27/2018
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

CERTIFICATION
Case 1:18-cv-06741-KAM-SMG OF ARBITRATION
Document ELIGIBILITY
1-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 22
Local Arbitration Rule 83.10 provides that with certain exceptions, actions seeking money damages only in an amount not in excess of $150,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, are eligible for compulsory arbitration. The amount of damages is presumed to be below the threshold amount unless a
certification to the contrary is filed.
Case is Eligible for Arbitration
I, __________________________________________,
GARY PORT counsel for____________________________,
Plaintiff do hereby certify that the above captioned civil action is ineligible for
compulsory arbitration for the following reason(s):
monetary damages sought are in excess of $150,000, exclusive of interest and costs,
the complaint seeks injunctive relief,
the matter is otherwise ineligible for the following reason
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - FEDERAL RULES CIVIL PROCEDURE 7.1

Identify any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more or its stocks:
RELATED CASE STATEMENT (Section VIII on the Front of this Form)

Please list all cases that are arguably related pursuant to Division of Business Rule 50.3.1 in Section VIII on the front of this form. Rule 50.3.1 (a) provides that “A civil case is “related”
to another civil case for purposes of this guideline when, because of the similarity of facts and legal issues or because the cases arise from the same transactions or events, a
substantial saving of judicial resources is likely to result from assigning both cases to the same judge and magistrate judge.” Rule 50.3.1 (b) provides that “ A civil case shall not be
deemed “related” to another civil case merely because the civil case: (A) involves identical legal issues, or (B) involves the same parties.” Rule 50.3.1 (c) further provides that
“Presumptively, and subject to the power of a judge to determine otherwise pursuant to paragraph (d), civil cases shall not be deemed to be “related” unless both cases are still
pending before the court.”
NY-E DIVISION OF BUSINESS RULE 50.1(d)(2)
1.) Is the civil action being filed in the Eastern District removed from a New York State Court located in Nassau or Suffolk
County? Yes No
2.) If you answered “no” above:

a) Did the events or omissions giving rise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur in Nassau or Suffolk
County? Yes No
b) Did the events or omissions giving rise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur in the Eastern
District? Yes No
c) If this is a Fair Debt Collection Practice Act case, specify the County in which the offending communication was
received:______________________________.
If your answer to question 2 (b) is “No,” does the defendant (or a majority of the defendants, if there is more than one) reside in Nassau or
Suffolk County, or, in an interpleader action, does the claimant (or a majority of the claimants, if there is more than one) reside in Nassau or
Yes No
Suffolk County?___________________________________
(Note: A corporation shall be considered a resident of the County in which it has the most significant contacts).
BAR ADMISSION
I am currently admitted in the Eastern District of New York and currently a member in good standing of the bar of this court.
Yes No
Are you currently the subject of any disciplinary action (s) in this or any other state or federal court?
Yes (If yes, please explain No
I certify the accuracy of all information provided above.
Signature: ____________________________________________________
Print Save As... Reset Last Modified: 11/27/2017

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the
Eastern District
__________ of of
District New York
__________
ERIC MURDOCK and BRENDA WILLIAMS )

)
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No. 18 cv 06741
)
UNITED AIRLINES INC, and JANE DOE, an )
unidentified employee of Defendant United Airlines, )
INC )
)
Defendant(s) )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendant’s name and address) United Airlines, Inc.

233 S. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
United States
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are:
Port and Sava
(516) 352-2999
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No. 18 cv 06741
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .
’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or
’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or
’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
’ Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Print Save As... Reset

Eric Murdock United Airlines Federal Lawsuit Documents

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Eric Murdock United Airlines Federal Lawsuit Documents

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Case 1:18-cv-06741-KAM-SMG Document 1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 1

LAW OFFICE OF GARY PORT PC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

ERIC MURDOCK and BRENDA WILLIAMS Docket # 18 cv 06741

UNITED AIRLINES, INC, and JANE DOE, an unidentified

Introduction and Summary

Plaintiffs were discriminated against, harassed, and humiliated by one of Defendant’s

flight attendants, an unidentified woman referred to as “JANE DOE.”

Plaintiffs were not arrested, as they had done nothing illegal.

3. The Plaintiff ERIC MURDOCK (“Murdock”), an African-American man, is a retired

4. The Plaintiff Brenda Williams (“Williams”), an African-American woman is a resident of

5. Defendant United Airlines, Inc. (“United”) is a major American airline headquartered in

Chicago, Illinois. Defendant is incorporated in Delaware. It conducts business in New

Airport, in Queens, New York, at Terminal B.

on July 13, 2018.

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, and 1367.

airports and five terminals.

Basketball Retired Players Association in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Las Vegas, Nevada.

row contained the emergency exit.

would be sitting there.

Plaintiff Murdock and demanded that he return to his ticketed seat.

clear and unoccupied.

emergency exit row.

Instead, DOE provided beverage service to the female.

28. Plaintiff Murdock then returned to the emergency exit row.

DOE’s confrontation with Plaintiff Murdock.

recording Defendant JANE DOE on her cellular telephone.

Williams surrender the phone.

unwanted, offensive physical contact.

grab the phone.

return to his seat.

Murdock told her to get out of his personal space.

unwanted, offensive physical contact.

condescending tone asked Plaintiff Murdock if he wanted a beverage or if he was “going

by the pilot to remain seated do to a security situation.

been the subject of many local news stories in New Jersey.

Transportation Security Administration.

allowed to retrieve their luggage and leave the airport.

from this event.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION, AND/OR RETENTION OF

would exist because of the employment.

thereby proximately causing plaintiffs’ injuries as set forth heretofore.

duties, Defendant United retained JANE DOE as an employee in conscious disregard of

the rights and safety of others.

the doctrine of respondeat superior.

disregard of Plaintiff’s rights. As such, punitive damages are warranted against

Defendants in order to punish and make an example of each of them.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

ASSAULT AGAINST PLAINTIFF WILLIAMS

Plaintiff Williams in imminent apprehension and fear of unwanted bodily contact.

will and ability to carry of the threat.

the doctrine of respondeat superior.

compensatory damage in an amount no less than $50,000.

Defendants in order to punish and make an example of each of them.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

ASSAULT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MURDOCK

disrespectful language placed Plaintiff Murdock in imminent apprehension and fear of

unwanted bodily contact.

the doctrine of respondeat superior.

compensatory damage in an amount no less than $50,000.

Defendants in order to punish and make an example of each of them.