PHILADELPHIA – A federal judge has decreed that a lawsuit brought by two passengers removed from an American Airlines flight nearly three years ago, will not be remanded to its state court of origin in Philadelphia.
Amanda Brown and Tiffany Nixon of Philadelphia filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on May 16, 2023 versus American Airlines Group, Inc., of Fort Worth, Texas.
American Airlines then removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on May 25, 2023, citing diversity of jurisdiction between the parties and the amount of damages at issue.
In his Jan. 23 memorandum opinion, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge John R. Padova reviewed the complaint’s allegations.
“On March 30, 2021, plaintiffs boarded a flight from New Orleans to Philadelphia operated by defendant. As others were still boarding, a flight attendant told plaintiff Brown that she needed to place her purse on the floor. Plaintiff Brown attempted to comply, but was delayed by the strap of her purse becoming tangled with her seatbelt. The flight attendant, mistakenly believing that plaintiff Nixon had said something, asked her to repeat what she had said. Plaintiff Nixon replied that she had not spoken, and the flight attendant left to speak with another flight attendant, who returned and told plaintiff Nixon to ‘be nice,” Padova said.
“Shortly thereafter, a large man approached plaintiffs and insisted on escorting them from the plane. Plaintiffs, who had been cooperative, polite and non-disruptive, were bewildered, but complied. The entire incident was witnessed and video recorded by plaintiffs’ friend, seated elsewhere on the plane. A large group of defendant’s employees, including the two flight attendants and eight pilots, stood in the jet way and watched as plaintiffs were removed from the plane. The crew then made several announcements to the remaining passengers stating that everything was fine and there had been no incident.”
Padova added that upon disembarking, the plaintiffs repeatedly requested the names of the flight attendants and pilot, as well as an explanation for their removal from the flight, but received no answers from American Airlines staff.
“Plaintiffs were rebooked, but on a less direct flight leaving the following morning, and they received no assistance with securing overnight accommodations. As plaintiffs had no transportation, they were forced to stay at a nearby motel which was distressingly filthy and dilapidated. Plaintiff Brown sought therapy due to symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder following the hotel stay,” Padova said.
“To date, the only explanation for the incident provided by defendant is that plaintiffs refused to wear facemasks on the plane, which the video shows was not the case. Plaintiffs are African-American and all employees they interacted with were Caucasian, suggesting racial animus as a motive for their otherwise unwarranted treatment.”
The plaintiffs motioned to remand the case to the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on July 1, a move which the defendant opposed – as the parties disagreed on whether the amount of damages at issue met or exceeded the federal court threshold of $75,000.
This led Padova to then issue his opinion on the matter of venue.
“In the complaint, plaintiffs demand damages in excess of $50,000 each and allege ‘significant monetary and emotional damages’ including ‘significant psychological trauma’ and ‘ongoing physical symptoms,’ which, for plaintiff Brown, necessitated ‘extensive psychotherapy.’ Moreover, plaintiffs allege that defendant’s employees were motivated by racial animus, which could support an award of punitive damages under Pennsylvania law. These allegations of serious injury, along with the availability of punitive damages, support a finding that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000,” Padova stated.
“We also consider the allegations in the notice of removal as to the amount in controversy. As we mentioned above, the notice of removal alleges that the amount in controversy has been met based on plaintiffs’ May 16, 2023 settlement demand letter [which sought $150,000 per plaintiff]. We are mindful of the limitations of settlement demands as a measure of the amount in controversy. Nonetheless, while not decisive, plaintiffs’ assertion that they would require $150,000 each for settlement is relevant evidence of their view of the value of the case, prior to removal. In contrast, settlement offers and demands made after removal cannot alter the amount in controversy, nor do we see them as probative of the value of plaintiffs’ claims in this case.”
As a result, Padova ruled that American Airlines had shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy in this case exceeds $75,000 and additionally, with the diversity of citizenship between the parties, the judge found the federal court has jurisdiction over this case and denied the plaintiffs’ motion to remand the case.
For counts of breach of contract, breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, false imprisonment, false light invasion of privacy, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiffs are seeking damages in excess of $50,000 each, as well as attorney’s fees and costs.
The plaintiffs are represented by Aaron A. Mixon of Mixon Law Firm, in Philadelphia.
The defendant is represented by Nathan R. Bohlander of Morgan & Akins, also in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-02001
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 230303330
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com