Court tosses out antitrust ruling against United Airlines in luggage dispute

RICHMOND, Va. - A federal appeals court ruled that a judge did not have enough information when he ruled that baggage-size frames used to weed out oversized carry-on luggage at Dulles International Airport illegally restricted competition among carriers. <br> <br> A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III&#39;s ruling in favor of Continental Airlines and returned the lawsuit to the district court for a more thorough review. <br> <br> &#34;In a nutshell, although the district court demonstrated mastery of many intricacies of antitrust law, it performed too quick an analysis on an insufficiently developed factual record,&#34; Judge Diana Motz wrote in the unanimous opinion. <br> <br> Last January, Ellis found that United Airlines and local managers of other airlines agreed to illegally restrict competition by installing the baggage templates in front of security checkpoints. <br> <br> United has been using the box-shaped, 10-inch-by-15-inch frames to set a maximum size for carry-on luggage since 1999. <br> <br> At Dulles -- located 25 miles west of Washington, D.C., in Virginia -- that made it difficult for passengers with luggage exceeding the maximum size to reach Continental gates. <br> <br> Continental allows passengers to carry larger bags on board and said the templates created a burden for the airline and its customers. <br> <br> United claimed that Continental suffered no real competitive harm because its customers could obtain tokens allowing them to bypass the baggage sizers, which had been authorized by Dulles&#39; Airports Management Council. <br> <br> Dick Favretto, lawyer for Chicago-based United, said he was pleased with the appeals court&#39;s ruling that there are enough disputed factual issues to send the case back to the lower court for closer scrutiny. <br> <br> &#34;The district court has to take under consideration a variety of factors, all of which we believe will tilt in our favor and result in a finding that the templates are legitimate under antitrust law,&#34; Favretto said. <br> <br> Alden Atkins, attorney for Houston-based Continental, declined to comment because he had not finished reading the ruling. <br> <br> <br> ------ <br> <br>

http://accesswdun.com/article/2002/1/200093