A New Jersey man is suing United Airlines, claiming he was urinated on by a heavily intoxicated passenger sitting next to him.
Daniel Card was on flight 1871 back home from Los Angeles when he says an extremely drunk passenger boarded the flight and sat next to him.
As the cross-country flight prepared for takeoff to Newark Airport, Card alleges in the suit, filed on Wednesday, that the inebriated man next to him in row 24 “took out his penis and aimed it at Card and proceeded to urinate all over Card’s leg, while Card was confined to his seat due to an imminent departure of the flight.”
Card said he tried to wake up the passed out passenger, who smelled strongly of alcohol, but could not. He then alerted the airline crew, who according to the suit, “refused [his] request to relocate his seat.” After several requests, Card says he was finally moved from the urine-soaked seat, but was “forced to endure the remainder of the flight to Newark/New Jersey while remaining in his urine drenched clothing.”
Once the plane landed in Newark Liberty International Airport, law enforcement was there to intervene. The FBI interviewed both Card and the drunk passenger once they were removed from the plane. The drunk passenger said he “had no recollection of the events on the flight, and only remembered being at a bar inside of Los Angeles International Airport, and then landing at Newark Airport.” The passenger also stated he had consumed at least four rum and cokes while at the airport bar in LA.
As part of United’s Contract of Carriage, there is an obligation of the airline to remove “passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew.”
Card believes law enforcement intervention would not have happened if his father, whom he called to inform of the incident, had not alerted them.
Card is suing for assault, negligence, breach of contract and emotional distress.
In a statement shared with Fox News, United said, “We have not yet been served with this suit and due to the pending litigation involved in this matter, we’re unable to provide further comment.”