NY judge rejects 9/11 suit against United Airlines

This Sept. 11, 2001 file photo shows smoke billowing up after the first of the two towers of the World Trade Center collapses in New York City. / HENNY RAY ABRAMS

NEW YORK United Airlines cannot be held responsible for the hijacking of an American Airlines flight and the collapse of a third World Trade Center building after the twin towers fell in the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.

The airline was not responsible for the collapse of 7 World Trade Center because it had no connection to American Airlines Flight 11 or its hijackers, except that it had shared responsibility for a security checkpoint in Portland, Maine, that screened two of the terrorists, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said. Regardless of their air carrier, all passengers at the time passed through the checkpoint.

Terrorists flew two commercial jets into the trade center towers on 9/11. Among them were Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz al Omari, who had passed through the Portland airport on their way to Boston, where they boarded Flight 11. Some debris from that jet's crash into the north tower pierced the facade of 7 World Trade Center, starting fires that caused the 47-story building, erected in 1987, to fall seven hours later.

The corporation that owns 7 World Trade Center sued various aviation defendants, including United, saying their negligence led to the building's destruction.

The judge said United could not have foreseen the chain of events that led to the building's collapse and bore no responsibility for ticketing, passenger check-in and boarding for the flight Atta and al Omari took to Boston, much less responsibility for the operation of the flight itself.

Other than shared authority for the lone security screening checkpoint at Portland International Jetport, "United had no connection to Flight 11 or its hijackers," the judge said.

He said it was "not within United's range of apprehension that terrorists would slip through" the Maine checkpoint, fly to Boston, proceed through another airline's security screening, board that air carrier's flight, hijack it and crash it into a skyscraper, causing another building to collapse.

Bud Perrone, a spokesman for Silverstein Properties, said the plaintiffs were disappointed by the ruling but looked forward to their prospects in a different lawsuit against United over security lapses that led terrorists to hijack United Flight 175.

"We are determined and look forward to presenting the facts before a jury, which will decide whether the defendants' insurance companies should finally be forced to pay up in order to finish the rebuilding of the World Trade Center," he said.

A message left with a lawyer for United Airlines was not immediately returned.

In dismissing a similar claim against Consolidated Edison Co. a year ago, the judge said it was unreasonable to think Con Ed could foresee the "strange, improbable, and attenuated chain of events that led to 7 World Trade Center's collapse."

A 52-story building now stands in place of 7 World Trade Center.

[cdraper5]

What boggles my mind is the fact that the "PEOPLE" that put the "REAL" 9/11 in motion or have knowledge about it and have caused the death of all the humans that have died (US citizens, soldiers, Iraqis and Afghans) as a result of this sinister plot are PURE EVIL.

[hypnotoad72]

Interesting lawsuit.

The company was negligent, though, by not preferring to profiteer instead of investing in its own company updated technology and trained personnel.

I'm ambivalent, but we all talk about responsibility and the other cant...

[thechooch1]

hypnotoad where do you come up with this notion? The terrorist that hijacked those aircraft did so with "weapons" that were allowed through security! Box cutters and small knives were legal to carry on an aircraft at the time. Now are you going to tell us that you saw this coming?

[FromCalifornia]

IMO, if United is even partially responsible then the people who designed and built the Trade Center were equally guilty for building a structure that would so obviously attract terrorists, and for placing it where they did. That makes about as much sense.

[PourpaixPourpaix]

Really? This was actually a lawsuit? Everybody who flies United now gets to pay the lawyers who defended the case, unless the judge was smart enough to slap the moron WTC owners with court and defense expenses.

Still, the lawsuit goes on against the other defendants. I guess I should sue the police next time my house gets robbed. Only in a lawyer's wet dream would anybody see any negligence on the airlines. Maybe our legal system needs to look up negligence in the dictionary and use that term instead of the perverse legal applications.

[hypnotoad72]

The terrorists should pay for it all, but they're not around. Now what?

Can an airline stop every possible terrorist issue?

Can the government, even if all of the info and articles that put out proof that the President prior to 9/11/2011 ignored every warning and shred of evidence...

In short, I just found a cause closer to the root cause than scapegoating some airline...

[enough-already]

Jeez, there are some CRAZY people out there with computers.
Wow! Kind of scary.

[enough-already]

Oh, that reminds me, THE GOVERNMENT killed JFK, too. Or the Mafia. Or the Cubans. Or maybe it was someone else...and we never landed on the moon,either! Riiigght!

[johnlockesghost]

Agreed.

[pbcityvet]

Finally a judge with some common sense!

[hypnotoad72]

Cool.

Then every student who was told to go back to college to retrain should be given refunds. Since the economic terrorism has led to the economic death of so many...

Try to think through all of the nuances before any namecalling, please... :)

[magnumdr]

Only in America!

[Strangerthan_u]

I still to this day do not see how "Some crash debris pierced the facade of 7 World Trade Center" caused this modern building to collapse at free-fall speed several hours after the initial event. The lies still circulated to this day make me sick to my stomach.