Nuts: Tasty Treats, Menace Of The Air, Or An Accurate Description Of The Plaintiff?
Long Island ophthalmologist Dr. Tehmina Haque claims she's been traumatized. Maybe so, but no doubt her four-year-old Ryahn will be equally traumatized when he's older. That's because his loving mother has made him the subject of a most shameful civil rights lawsuit against American Airlines.
AA's offense? Failing to keep its flights free of peanuts. Ryahn's injury? None, but he could have been hurt. Perhaps, in the parallel bizarro-universe, he was hurt.
For the entire flight . . . plaintiff remained fearful, tense and anxious as she watched over her son's every breath and body twitch, concerned that at any moment her son could have an anaphylactic reaction while imprisoned 35,000 feet into the air," read the lawsuit filed Monday in state Supreme Court in Manhattan.
And that's it. No injuries at all. Tehmina and Ryahn Haque got off their flight from JFK to Los Angeles, then presumably spent an enjoyable vacation kickin' it in Compton or wherever they were headed.
Dr. Haque claims that she was assured right up to the boarding gate that her flight would be peanut-free, but as AA's website points out, that's logistically impossible:
American recognizes that some passengers are allergic to peanuts. Although we do not serve peanuts, we do serve other nut products and there may be trace elements of unspecified peanut ingredients, including peanut oils, in meal and snacks.
We make no provisions to be peanut-free. Additionally, other customers may bring peanuts on board. Therefore, we cannot guarantee customers will not be exposed to peanuts during flight and strongly encourage customers to take all necessary medical precautions to prepare for the possibility of exposure.
Surely as an ophthalmologist, in other words a medical doctor, Dr. Haque has received training at some point in her life on dealing with anaphylaxis, and has heard of the device known to most parents an "epi-pin." She may even own one.
But then she never needed to use it, because she's suing for hypothetical injuries, injuries which never occurred. The risk of which she complains, a flight where others are allowed to eat nuts, can't be controlled without making airline travel even more of a joke than it already is.
Here's hoping American does the right thing and vigorously defends her frivolous lawsuit.
Last 5 posts by Patrick Non-White
- Significant Developments In D.C. Anti-SLAPP Law. - June 5th, 2014
- Does The Internet Need A United Nations When It Doesn't Have A First Amendment? - March 24th, 2014
- Fear And Loathing In Falls Church - January 4th, 2014
- Eventually That Animal Is Going To Turn On You, And You're Going To End Up The Victim! - December 5th, 2013
- if you MARRY! like your REPRODUCE! doctor you OBEY! can keep NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT! your doctor. SUBMIT! if you CONSUME! like your STAY ASLEEP! plan you can WATCH TV! keep it. BUY! period. NO IMAGINATION! - December 4th, 2013