![]() At the end of the testing period, Southwest had not decided whether to license SwiftAir’s software platform, but for a time Southwest continued “to work toward some arrangement whereby the SwiftAir product would be refined and deployed ultimately to Southwest planes.” In the end, however, Southwest decided not to license SwiftAir’s software platform. Installing the software platform on Southwest’s planes also required SwiftAir to enter into an agreement with the company that operated Southwest’s inflight WiFi service, Row 44, Inc. In August 2011 SwiftAir and Southwest entered into a “Beta Test Agreement” in which Southwest agreed to evaluate the software platform by testing it for eight weeks on some of Southwest’s WiFi-enabled aircraft, to report to SwiftAir during the testing period on the software’s performance, and to notify SwiftAir within 30 days after the testing period whether Southwest intended to use the software “on an extended basis.” The agreement also provided that, in the event Southwest “elect to continue use” of the software platform, Southwest and SwiftAir would “enter into good faith discussions prior to the termination of the Initial Term to negotiate a full license agreement.” The parties later amended the Beta Test Agreement to extend the period of testing to 24 weeks, from Septemthrough March 28, 2012. Later that year Southwest expressed an interest in evaluating the software platform for use on its flights. SwiftAir Develops a Software Platform That Southwest Decides Not To License In 2010 SwiftAir was beginning to develop a software platform that would allow airplane passengers to purchase, while 2 in flight, coupons and vouchers the passengers could use at restaurants and other local merchants in their destination cities. SwiftAir also contends the court erred in denying motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial in which SwiftAir argued the jury was required to award reliance damages on SwiftAir’s breach of contract cause of action. On appeal SwiftAir contends the trial court erred in granting Southwest’s motion for summary adjudication because the ADA did not preempt any of its causes of action. A jury then determined Southwest was not liable for breach of contract, finding SwiftAir failed to prove it was harmed by Southwest’s failure to comply with the parties’ agreement. The trial court granted Southwest’s motion for summary adjudication on SwiftAir’s non-contract causes of action on the ground they were preempted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act (49 U.S.C. After Southwest ultimately decided not to license the software, SwiftAir filed this action against Southwest for breach of contract, fraud, and other causes of action. agreed that SwiftAir would develop a software platform offering certain inflight deals to Southwest passengers and that Southwest would test the software to determine whether to license it. INTRODUCTION SwiftAir, LLC and Southwest Airlines Co. Holmgren Johnson: Mitchell Madden and Dennis M. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Nancy Newman and Elaine W. ![]() SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO., Defendant and Respondent. Thus, Southwest did not need to prove that SwiftAir’s claims would have a significant economic effect on Southwest’s services.įiled 3/11/22 modified and certified for publication 4/5/22 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN SWIFTAIR, LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, B303314 (Los Angeles County Super. Here, the subject of the contract was providing passengers with inflight entertainment and wireless internet access, which are considered “services” under the ADA. For a claim to be preempted by the ADA, 1.) the claim must derive from state law, and (2) the claim must relate to airline rates, routes, or services, either by expressly referring to them or by having a significant economic effect upon them. The remaining claim was presented to a jury, which found in Southwest’s favor. The trial court granted summary judgment in Southwest’s favor, finding that the Airline Deregulation Act (“ADA”) preempted all but one of SwiftAir’s claims. When Southwest decided not to license the software, SwiftAir filed various breach of contract and fraud claims against Southwest. In turn, Southwest would test the software to determine whether to license it. Under the agreement, SwiftAir would develop software for Southwest. The plaintiff, SwiftAir, entered into an agreement with the defendant, Southwest Airlines (“Southwest”).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |