MAX GIN and JOHNNIE FONG as former partners of FONG AND GIN ENTERPRISES a dissolved Hawaii General Partnership Plaintiffs v THE WACKENHUT CORPORATION Defendant Civil No 89 0097 SPK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII 741 F Supp 1454 1990 U S Dist LEXIS 8718 May 30 1990 Decided May 30 1990 Filed CASE SUMMARY PROCEDURAL POSTURE Plaintiffs former partners in a general partnership specializing in wholesale jewelry brought a negligence action against defendant security checkpoint operator to recover the value of jewelry lost during the process of proceeding through a security checkpoint at an international airport The court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law after hearing the case OVERVIEW The partners alleged that a piece of luggage was lost at an airport security checkpoint after a woman ahead of one of the partners needed four attempts before being cleared causing the partner to become separated from a bag containing 200 000 in jewelry The jewelry was not recovered The partners asserted causes of action based on inter alia negligent bailment and sought punitive damages The court applying the law of the State of Florida where the incident occurred concluded that a bailment was created Testimony was adduced indicating that due to the placement of the magnetometer a passenger could not see his bag for some length of time and thus surrendered control of it The court concluded that the security checkpoint operator failed to exercise the requisite degree of care In fact on average bags were lost twice a week As an independent contractor the operator was ordered to pay damages in the amount of 140 000 plus prejudgment interest at the statutory rate OUTCOME The court found the security checkpoint operator liable for damages in the amount of 140 000 to the partners for negligent bailment of the bag containing the partners jewelry CORE TERMS bag passenger bailment magnetometer checkpoint machine baggage airline tariff jewelry contractor alarm hand baggage airport degree of care bailee ticket theft metal woman choice of law claimant flight gate departure safeguard security services present case period of time luggage LexisNexis Headnotes Hide Headnotes Civil Procedure Federal State Interrelationships Erie Doctrine HN1 Under the Erie case a federal district court is to apply the substantive law of the state in which it sits This ruling was extended to apply to the state s choice of law rules Civil Procedure Federal State Interrelationships Choice of Law General Overview HN2 According to the Hawaii Supreme Court a fact specific approach to choice of law should be utilized one which assesses the interests and policy factors involved with a purpose of arriving at a desirable result in each situation Contracts Law Types of Contracts Bailments HN3 Under Florida law it has come to be recognized that a bailee who has the sole actual and exclusive physical possession of the goods is presumed to be negligent if he cannot explain the loss or disappearance of the goods and the law imposes on him the burden of showing that he exercised the degree of care required by the nature of the bailment Contracts Law Types of Contracts Bailments Evidence Inferences Presumptions General Overview Torts Negligence Proof General Overview HN4 Under Florida law once a plaintiff has proven the existence of a bailment and demonstrated the failure of the bailee to return the bailed goods a presumption of negligence on the part of the bailee arises COUNSEL 1 JOHN RAPP ESQ Honolulu Hawaii KEVIN S W CHEE ESQ GREGORY K MARKHAM ESQ Honolulu Hawaii JUDGES Samuel P King United States District Judge OPINION BY KING OPINION 1455 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW SAMUEL P KING UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter came on for trial on April 18 1990 Having considered all the evidence memoranda and arguments of the parties the court hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law I Findings of Fact Plaintiff Max Gin Gin commenced this action seeking to recover the value of certain items of jewelry lost during the process of proceeding through a security checkpoint at Miami International Airport 1 Gin asserts that the negligence of the defendant Wackenhut Corporation Wackenhut which operated the security checkpoint precipitated the loss of the jewelry Footnotes 1 Leave was given at trial to amend the complaint to include Gin s former business partner plaintiff Johnnie Fong Fong so that all parties in interest would be bound by the outcome of this trial End Footnotes At the time of the 2 loss Max Gin was a partner with Johnnie Fong in the firm of Fong Gin Enterprises a partnership specializing in wholesale jewelry sales It was the practice of plaintiffs Gin and Fong to travel sometimes together and at other times separately to wholesale jewelry shows throughout the mainland United States where they would ply their wares to jewelry retailers On the day of the loss Gin had just completed a show in Miami and was enroute to New Orleans where he was to meet his partner and to participate in another show After the Miami show Gin was dropped at the airport by several friends Gin left his checked bags with a skycap at the curbside and proceeded directly to the departure gate with only a carry on bag containing his jewelry Defendant Wackenhut operated a security checkpoint at the entrance to the terminal area containing Gin s departure gate This checkpoint was typical of those found at airports around the 1456 country consisting of an X ray machine for examining baggage with an adjacent magnetometer to detect the presence of metal upon persons passing into the departure area Gin testified that once he approached the checkpoint he waited to one side until the 3 line of people waiting for the magnetometer had dwindled He then placed his bag on the conveyor belt leading into the X ray machine and stepped up to the magnetometer Just at that moment a woman wearing a heavy coat abruptly cut in front of Gin and passed through the magnetometer ahead of him In passing through the magnetometer the woman activated the metal detection alarm The Wackenhut employee who operated the magnetometer motioned for Gin to wait on the terminal side of the magnetometer while the woman emptied the contents of her pockets onto a tray stepped back to Gin s side of the machine and passed through once more The alarm sounded a second time Gin continued to wait while the woman produced more objects from her
View Full Document
Unlocking...