Article 19 provides carrier liability “for damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air of passengers, baggage or cargo.” Montreal Convention, art. 19. Consideration of these three sections in conjunction with Article 29 — which governs preemption under the Convention — compels the conclusion that “for all air transportation to which the Convention applies, if an action for damages, however founded, falls within one of the Convention’s three damage provisions, the Convention provides the sole cause of action under which a claimant may seek redress for [her] injuries.” Weiss v. El Al Israel Airlines, Ltd., 433 F.Supp.2d 361, 365 (S.D.N.Y.2006). 1. Plaintiffs Breach of Contract Claim Is Not Preempted by the Montreal Convention 24, 2009 WL 1584899, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. June 3, 2009) (<HOLDING>); In re Nigeria Charter Flights Contract
holding that the montreal convention was not applicable to plaintiffs claims because based on plaintiffs allegations it clearly appears that through its employees continental refused to perform the contract holding plaintiffs breach of contract claim was not preempted by the montreal convention because plaintiff was seeking damages resulting from deltas refusal to provide him with any flight home after having taken his money for a ticket  in short for failure to perform its obligation to provide carriage in exchange for money it had received holding that a contract must entitle the plaintiff to money damages in the event of the governments breach of that contract holding a claim for money damages is an adequate remedy at law and so it does not provide a sufficient basis for injunctive relief notwithstanding the possibility that a money judgment will be uncollectible holding plaintiff may sue federal agents for money damages for violation of his constitutional rights