Real-World Stakes:

• • Burns are one of the most painful injuries a person can endure, often requiring extensive treatment and leaving permanent scars.
  • Severe burn victims frequently struggle with mental health issues like PTSD, anxiety and depression afterwards.
  • Facial and visible body scarring from burns can have profound impacts on self-image, relationships, and quality of life.
  • Medical care costs for major burns can easily climb into six figures, on top of lost income during treatment and recovery.
  • An airline’s slightest negligence can change a passenger’s life forever if it leads to disfiguring injuries like those alleged here.

Key Evidence to Collect:

• • Incident reports from the flight crew describing how the spill occurred and their response
  • Cockpit voice recordings and flight data capturing any discussions of turbulence or the fasten seatbelt sign being on
  • Witness statements from passengers who saw the incident and can describe relevant circumstances
  • JetBlue’s policies and procedures for in-flight hot beverage service and turbulence protocols
  • Plaintiff’s complete medical records documenting burn injuries, treatment, scarring, prognosis and emotional distress

FAQs:

• • Who determines if turbulence is too risky for beverage service? The captain has ultimate authority, but flight attendants can also suspend service if conditions are unsafe.
  • Does it matter if the spill was truly an “accident”? No – airlines are liable for flight crew negligence regardless of intent.
  • What agency investigates airline accidents? The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is responsible for civil aviation accident investigations.
  • How “hot” is too hot for airplane tea or coffee? The FDA recommends against serving drinks hotter than 140°F, as liquids over 150°F can cause near-instant burns.
  • Is JetBlue known for safety issues? It has a fairly standard safety record for a major carrier, with a few serious incidents but no fatal accidents since launching in 2000.

Elements to Prove:

• • JetBlue, as a common carrier, owed Ms. Lewis the duty to exercise the highest degree of care during her flight.
  • The flight attendant’s affirmative act of spilling tea on Ms. Lewis was a clear breach of that duty of utmost care.
  • The tea was brewed to a dangerous and unreasonable temperature capable of causing near-instant severe burns.
  • Serving beverages during a bumpy flight with the fasten seatbelt sign on violated the standard of care.
  • JetBlue’s safety protocols and training were insufficient to prevent this foreseeable hot liquid spill injury scenario.

Possible Defenses:

• • The passenger failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety, such as by removing her seatbelt during beverage service.
  • Spilling a drink is a common occurrence on flights that doesn’t necessarily indicate negligence or breach of care.
  • Brewing tea requires water hot enough for it to steep, and passengers know to exercise caution with hot liquids.
  • Flight attendants cannot predict or prevent all beverage spills, especially if a sudden jolt occurs during service.
  • The plaintiff’s alleged damages are overstated or not all directly caused by the tea spill incident itself.

FAQs:

• • Do airlines owe a higher duty of care than other businesses? Yes, as common carriers, they’re held to the highest standard of care for passenger safety.
  • Is turbulence considered an “act of God” the airline isn’t liable for? Not if they continued serving hot drinks despite dangerous conditions.
  • Doesn’t choosing to fly mean assuming some inherent risk? Passengers don’t assume risks created by the airline’s own negligence.
  • What if the flight attendant was burned too? JetBlue is still vicariously liable for their employee’s negligence in the course of their duties.
  • How hard is it to prove a negligence case against an airline? They’re challenging, as airlines have robust defense attorneys, but strong evidence of carelessness and serious injuries can prevail.

Pros & Cons of Additional Claims:

• • Products liability shifts the focus to equipment vs. airline/employee conduct, but requires a manufact defect.
  • Warranty claims imply a guarantee of safety that hot spill accidents may inherently breach, but the airline may disclaim them.
  • Negligent training arguments could bolster the core negligence claim by highlighting larger corporate safety culture issues.
  • Recklessness or gross negligence claims raise the stakes and potential damages but have an extremely high burden to prove.
  • NIED could provide a path to recovering for emotional trauma even without a physical impact, but is hard to prove.

Legal Strategy Considerations:

• • Focus on the core common carrier negligence claim as the clearest path to proving liability for the passenger’s injuries.
  • Plead multiple causes of action to cast a wide liability net, even if some are harder to prove than others.
  • Conduct thorough discovery into JetBlue’s history of prior beverage spill incidents, turbulence policies, and safety procedures.
  • Highlight how the company’s ordinary negligence rose to the level of gross negligence with knowing safety risks.
  • Pursue a negligent infliction of emotional distressclaim to convey the severity of trauma and distress Ms. Lewis endured from this ordeal.

FAQs:

• • What’s the burden of proof for a products liability claim against an airline? The plaintiff must show a product defect made the tea unreasonably dangerous when used as intended.
  • Are airlines required to have beverage temperature policies? Not expressly, but they’re expected to adopt reasonable procedures to minimize risks to passengers.
  • How can inadequate staff training create liability for the airline? It can show a systemic failure to properly equip employees to handle duties with the highest standard of care.
  • What’s the difference between ordinary and gross negligence? Gross negligence is an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of care, showing reckless disregard for safety.
  • Do you have to be physically impacted to claim emotional distress? Not necessarily – if the distress is serious enough, a near-miss or zone of danger may suffice.

Factors Affecting Case Value:

• • Severity and permanence of burns and scarring, especially in highly visible areas like the face
  • Prognosis for future treatment needs like skin grafts, reconstructive surgeries, mental health care
  • Extent of economic losses like high past and future medical bills, lost earning capacity
  • Degree of pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and other human damages
  • Egregiousness of JetBlue’s conduct and whether punitive damages may be warranted

Damage Valuation Approaches:

• • Tally concrete economic losses like medical bills, lost wages to establish baseline special damages
  • Research verdicts and settlements in comparable airline burn injury cases to estimate reasonable ranges
  • Consider plaintiff-specific factors like age, occupation, family status that may influence a jury
  • Use a multiplier or per diem method to quantify abstract damages like pain and suffering, emotional distress
  • Account for degree of comparative fault, strength of liability proofs, witness credibility in discounting value

FAQs:

• • Are there damage caps that limit recovery in airline injury cases? Depends – some states cap non-economic or punitive damages, but many have exceptions for common carriers.
  • Does the plaintiff’s own health insurance coverage matter? Yes – the airline may argue failure to mitigate damages if recommended treatments weren’t pursued.
  • How can you prove future medical needs and costs? Physician testimony on prognosis, life care planner expertise on projected expenses.
  • What’s a typical pain and suffering multiplier? While case-specific, insurance industry research suggests a range of 1.5 to 5 times special damages.
  • Will JetBlue try to lowball the claim to minimize publicity? Likely yes, but if their offer is unreasonable, filing a lawsuit may be the only leverage.

Proving Negligence Through Experts:

• • A food safety expert can opine that the tea was served at an unreasonably hot temperature capable of instantly scalding skin.
  • An airline practices expert may testify that beverage service is prohibited under the turbulent conditions reported.
  • An airline training expert can discuss how JetBlue’s procedures or lack thereof fell short of industry safety standards.
  • The treating burn surgeon’s testimony brings to life the severity and permanence of injuries the scalding tea caused.
  • A mental health expert can powerfully speak to the ongoing psychological suffering burn victims endure long after the incident.

Other Evidence Considerations:

• • Obtain full flight records including cockpit voice recordings to determine the extent of turbulence warnings during incident
  • Request all JetBlue training manuals, handbooks, memos regarding in-flight beverage services, burn risks, safety protocols
  • Identify all prior incidents of in-flight burns or scalds from hot liquids spilled on JetBlue passengers to establish notice
  • Secure full medical records, photos, psychiatric evaluations documenting Ms. Lewis’s extensive treatment and suffering
  • Investigate brewing equipment suppliers and maintenance history to assess possible products liability angle

FAQs:

• • What if JetBlue’s beverage temperature records are missing or destroyed? The absence of key safety documentation itself suggests negligence and spoliation of evidence.
  • How can experts establish an airline’s standard of care? Through FAA regulations, industry trade group standards, and major carriers’ policies and practices.
  • Does Ms. Lewis have to be burned by the tea itself? No – if her injuries resulted from trying to avoid the unreasonably hot liquid, that’s still compensable.
  • What if cabin surveillance footage shows the incident? It could be the smoking gun proving negligence or an unavoidable accident, depending on details caught on tape.
  • Are airline employees’ social media posts about the incident admissible? Possibly, if they contradict official reports or suggest misconduct – eDiscovery may be key.

Questions: Airline Negligence Lawsuits

• • 1. What legal duty of care do airlines owe passengers?
    • A) Ordinary duty of reasonable care
    • B) Highest duty of utmost care
    • C) No special duty beyond basic negligence
    • D) Absolute liability for any injury
  • 2. Which is not an element of a negligence claim against an airline?
    • A) Duty owed by airline to passenger
    • B) Breach of that duty
    • C) Intentional misconduct by airline
    • D) Causation and damages
  • 3. What’s the most common defense airlines raise in injury cases?
    • A) No negligence – injury was an unavoidable accident
    • B) Plaintiff assumed the risk by choosing to fly
    • C) Jet lag caused the passenger’s alleged injuries
    • D) Another passenger is the proximate cause
  • 4. Which type of damages are unavailable in airline negligence cases?
    • A) Medical expenses
    • B) Lost wages
    • C) Pain and suffering
    • D) Change fees for missed connections
  • 5. What’s the statute of limitations to sue an airline for injuries?
    • A) 6 months from date of incident
    • B) 1 year from date of incident
    • C) 2 years from date of incident
    • D) 4 years from date of incident

Answers: Airline Negligence Lawsuits

• • 1. B) As common carriers, airlines owe passengers the highest duty of care to ensure their safe transport. This is a heightened standard beyond ordinary negligence.
  • 2. C) Intentional misconduct is a separate legal claim from negligence, which only requires proving the airline breached its duty of care, not that it intended harm.
  • 3. A) Airlines often argue an injury was caused by an unforeseeable, unavoidable accident despite their exercise of due care – negating negligence.
  • 4. D) Consequential economic losses like change fees for missed flights are generally not compensable in airline personal injury claims, only direct damages.
  • 5. C) For most injury claims against airlines, passengers have 2 years from the date of the incident to file a lawsuit, though some exceptions may apply.

Disclaimer

The information provided in this article discussing the JetBlue hot tea spill lawsuit and airline negligence claims is for general educational purposes only. It should not be construed as formal legal advice or as creating an attorney-client relationship.

Laws and legal precedents change over time and may vary across jurisdictions. The details of this case are still developing and additional facts may emerge that could impact the analysis. As such, if you have been injured due to airline negligence, you should consult a licensed attorney in your area to discuss the unique circumstances of your potential claim. Most aviation accident lawyers provide free initial case evaluations.