they took the case because of the implications and precedent it will set for all Airlines. Pretty important I guess..
Pretty surprising that it's ainer fun unzere that is suing.
Voos iz zain noomen doo?
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/boardingarea/viewfromthewing/~3/vu00FfYsy-c/
"Delta (which took over Northwest) is represented in the case by former Solicitor General Paul Clement, a real legal heavyweight"
Dachsich meer az er maint a yid.
Same guy who lost the ObamaCare case?
Isn't he the one who represented Rubashkin in front of the supreme court?
IIRC he has argued about 30 cases in front of the Supreme Court very few lawyers argued more cases then him. However, am not familiar with all of them but the two mentioned here and he lost both of them. Percentage wise that is...
More like 70 cases....http://www.bancroftpllc.com/professionals/paul-d-clement/
Respondent and amici suggest that Wolens is not controlling because frequent flyer programs have fundamentally changed since the time of that decision. We are told that “most miles [are now] earned without consuming airline services” and are “spent without consuming airline services.” Brief for State of California et al. 18 (emphasis deleted). But whether or not this alleged change might have some impact in a future case, it is not implicated here. In this case, respondent did not assert that he earned his miles from any activity other than taking flights or that he attempted to redeem miles for anything other than tickets and upgrades. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 47–48.
