## Facts

- Terri and Roger Dudley were ticketed passengers on Business Express Flight 4526 from Boston, Massachusetts, to Lebanon, New Hampshire.
- The flight used a Beech Model 1900 aircraft manufactured by Beech and operated by Business Express.
- Terri Dudley alleged that, while boarding, she struck her head on the aircraft doorway area and was injured.
- Plaintiffs alleged resulting cognitive and memory problems and substantial medical expenses.
- Plaintiffs asserted negligence theories against Business Express, including unsafe maintenance, negligent hiring/training, and failure to warn about an unsafe entrance condition.
- The complaint also pleaded strict liability and breach of warranty claims; Roger Dudley asserted loss of consortium.

## Issues

1. Whether state-law negligence and strict liability claims for a passenger’s personal injuries during boarding are expressly preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act’s bar on state laws “relating to rates, routes, or services” of an air carrier.

## Decision

- The court denied defendants’ motions to dismiss the negligence and strict liability claims.
- The court held that the pleaded personal-injury tort claims based on unsafe boarding conditions and inadequate warnings were not expressly preempted by ADA § 1305(a).
- Applying the Rule 12(b)(6) standard, the court treated the complaint’s factual allegations as true and allowed plaintiffs to proceed on viable theories.

## Legal Principles

- Express preemption turns on congressional intent; courts presume traditional state police-power domains, including health and safety, are not displaced absent a clear and manifest purpose.
- ADA § 1305(a) preempts state laws “relating to rates, routes, or services” of an air carrier, a phrase interpreted in light of the statute’s goal of economic deregulation.
- State tort claims for physical injury tied to passenger safety (e.g., boarding safety, aircraft condition, warnings) do not necessarily “relate to” an airline’s rates, routes, or economic services merely because they involve air transportation.
- On a motion to dismiss, dismissal is warranted only when, on the pleaded facts, the plaintiff cannot recover under any viable legal theory.

## Conclusion

The district court held that the Airline Deregulation Act’s express preemption clause does not bar ordinary state tort remedies for personal injuries allegedly caused by unsafe boarding conditions and inadequate warnings, and it permitted the negligence and strict liability claims to proceed past the pleading stage.


Dudley v. Bus. Express, Inc., 882 F. Supp. 199 (D.N.H. 1994)