Dana Holcomb v. American Airlines Company, American Airlines Captain, NU, American Airlines Flight Attendant, NU, and Curtis Blessing

Summary

The Texas Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment dismissing Dana Holcomb’s claims against American Airlines and related appellees. The court held that Holcomb failed to produce evidence supporting the elements of his intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress and breach-of-contract claims, and it did not reach the merits of his Arizona statutory negligence-per-se theory.

Holdings

1. Because Holcomb did not appeal the trial court's order striking his exhibits, the appellate court could not consider those exhibits in reviewing the summary judgment.
2. Summary judgment was proper because Holcomb produced no evidence that appellees acted intentionally or recklessly, engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct, caused his emotional distress, or caused severe emotional distress.
3. Summary judgment was proper because Holcomb produced no evidence of a valid contract, his performance or tendered performance, appellees' breach, or damages caused by the breach.
4. The trial court did not err in granting appellees' combined traditional and no-evidence motion for summary judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly granted appellees' combined traditional and no-evidence motion for summary judgment on Holcomb's intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim.
2. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment on Holcomb's breach-of-contract claim.
3. Whether the appellate court could consider summary-judgment exhibits struck by the trial court.
4. Whether Holcomb produced evidence raising a genuine issue of material fact in opposition to the no-evidence motion.

Disposition

affirmed