## Facts

- Lichten, a paying passenger, flew on Eastern Airlines from Miami to Philadelphia on January 18, 1947 and checked two bags.
- One bag arrived in Philadelphia; the second was mistakenly carried onward to Newark.
- In Newark, Eastern released the bag to an unknown person without requiring surrender of Lichten’s baggage check.
- The bag was later returned to Eastern and ultimately delivered back to Lichten, who found three items of jewelry missing, valued at $3,187.95.
- Eastern was a certificated air carrier regulated by the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938 and had filed a tariff with the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB).
- The tariff’s Rule 10 provided that “money, jewelry … and similar valuables” would be carried only at the passenger’s risk and that the carrier would not be liable for loss of such items, whether or not the carrier knew of their presence.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Eastern based on the tariff; Lichten appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a CAB-filed tariff provision excluding an air carrier’s liability for loss of jewelry in checked baggage is valid and enforceable against a passenger.
2. Whether such a tariff provision applies even if the loss is alleged to have resulted from the carrier’s negligence in handling and releasing the baggage.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Eastern.
- The court held the tariff provisions excluding liability for jewelry in checked baggage were valid and controlling unless and until disapproved by the CAB.
- The exclusion applied to Lichten’s claim for missing jewelry, even assuming negligent mishandling of the baggage.

## Legal Principles

- A duly filed air-carrier tariff under the Civil Aeronautics Act has binding effect and becomes part of the contract of carriage.
- In a federal regulatory tariff system, statutory and administrative controls displace contrary common-law limits on carrier exculpation, unless the responsible agency rejects the tariff.
- Courts generally enforce filed tariff terms as written in private damages actions; challenges to the reasonableness or lawfulness of tariff liability provisions must be pursued through the administrative process.
- Clear tariff language excluding liability for specified classes of property (including jewelry) bars recovery for loss of those items in checked baggage.

## Conclusion

Because Eastern’s CAB-filed tariff plainly excluded liability for jewelry in checked baggage and had not been rejected through the administrative process, the exclusion governed the parties’ rights and barred Lichten’s claim for the missing jewelry, notwithstanding allegations of negligent handling.


Lichten v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 189 F.2d 939 (2d Cir. 1951)