A Texas man has sued Lufthansa, saying the German airline should have been prepared for turbulence on his flight. On the other hand, he was not wearing a seatbelt, which is never a smart thing even when the seatbelt light is off. Is there any basis to this Lufthansa turbulence lawsuit?
Lufthansa Turbulence Lawsuit: Man Sues German Carrier For Injury Even Though He Was Not Wearing Seatbelt
Elwaleed Sidahmed was flying from Austin (AUS) to Frankfurt (FRA) on March 1, 2023 on Lufthansa 469. That flight, which we covered last year, encountered severe turbulence over Tennessee. As Sidahmed’s lawsuit alleges:
“At around, or just over, an hour into the flight and while flying at cruising altitude of approximately 37,000 feet, and still over the United States, Lufthansa 469 flew into exceptionally strong, dangerous, severe, and extreme turbulence resulting in sudden large and abrupt changes in aircraft altitude and attitude, with large variations in airspeed, including a sudden drop and violent vertical aircraft oscillations, and violent aircraft jolting, shaking, and rocking, causing several passengers, including Sidahmed, to fly up out of their seats and slam against the cabin interior and seats, and throwing objects throughout the cabin.”
Picture like the one above demonstrate the severity of the turbulence.
With passengers and crew members injured, the flight diverted to Washington Dulles (IAD).
But Sidahmed says Lufthansa could have done far more to prepare passengers for the “forecast” turbulence:
“Lufthansa 469’s flight crew failed to warn the passengers of any upcoming turbulence before the sudden violent, severe, and extreme turbulence that injured several passengers, including Sidahmed, or otherwise of any need to stay in their seats with their seatbelts fastened, and the seatbelt sign was not illuminated.”
Sidahmed claims that as a result of Lufthansa’s “negligence” he has suffered from a lumbar back fracture and disc herniation:
“As a result of being ejected from his seat from the sudden exceptionally strong, severe, and extreme turbulence, Sidahmed violently struck the cabin ceiling and was thrown violently back down to his seat, which resulted in serious injuries, including lumbar back fracture and disc herniation.”
The lawsuit also, disturbingly, contends that the flihgt crew repeatedly instructed passengers to delete photos and video due to “German privacy law.”
To that I say quatsch (nonsense in German). I’m not sure I would give the crew credit for thinking ahead so as to avoid liability, but the idea that photos like the ones above had to be deleted do not implicate German privacy law: they are simply self-serving.
Sidahmed argues severe thunderstorms along LH469’s flight path were forecast several hours in advance of the flight and therefore the flight crew was on notice and should have taken steps to prevent unnecessary injury. Therefore, he argues it is guilty of negligence and must compensate not only for medical expenses related to his injuries, but for:
- lost income and earnings
- loss of earning capacity
- physical pain and suffering
- mental anguish
- loss of enjoyment of life
- physical impairment
You can read his lawsuit complaint here.
CONCLUSION
Pilots cannot be held responsible for the weather, but can they be held responsibly for ignoring weather reports?
A departed friend of mine (rest in peace Mike…) used to get upset when there was any turbulence onboard, angrily blaming the pilot. It always made me laugh, but this lawsuit is no laughing matter. I can understand the outrage if pilots knowingly ignored turbulence warnings and did not even bother to turn on the seatbelt light.
But it merits mentioning that even if the seatbelt light was off, we should always keep our seatbelts fastened when seated. It jsut makes sense. Those passengers who were buckled in suffered no injury.
However this lawsuit turns out, I do hope Sidahmed makes a full recovery.
Maybe Lufthansa should sue the jerk for not wearing his seatbelt. Sheesh, talk about frivolous lawsuits.
If there were successful lawsuits for turbulence, airlines wouldn’t fly between cities with a temperature difference.
I once flew on a flight that had a temperature difference between Pittsburgh and Chicago. The pilot explained that there was a greater chance of turbulence in that region. It was very bumpy part of that area. The flight was east coast to west coast.
@derek … Have there been any successful lawsuits for turbulence ? I have never read about an example .
Maybe airlines should just leave the seatbelt sign on every flight there is even a thought of a cloud or any turbulence, and have the crew skip doing a service for safety reasons? Wait, that’s DL/AA just about every other day….
As I recall this incident was the result of clear-air turbulence, and not t-storms. Perhaps other information has since been discovered. His injuries appear painful, but turbulence can happen unexpectedly and the seatbelt was available for his use. My sympathy to those hurt but a windfall lawsuit this is not.
Lufthansa’s defense is called “assumption of the risk.”
The complaint (thanks for the link) shows three attorneys listed as representing the complainant. The first is the local attorney presumably to comply with court rules. The second and third work at Krutch Lindell Bingham Jones. That firm’s website lists its practice areas, and the first one on the menu is “Airplane and Helicopter Crash Attorneys.” I can hear the ambulance siren while I type this.
Probably like Barry Glazer in Baltimore… the TV ads have “medical nurse on staff” scrolling across the bottom on a loop.
Definitely an unclean hands defense here, since Elwalid wasn’t wearing a seatbelt.
Noticeably absent from the complaint is any reference to ATC communications between LH469 and Fort Worth, Houston, Memphis, Indianapolis, or Washington centers – all of which would have had oversight into portions of this flight. Did LH469 request a different route? Was that request denied? Did LH469 request a different altitude? And was that request denied?
Well, we have a lawsuit culture where anyone can sue anyone for the most stupid things. Just another one to the list.
@Santastico … +1 . Perhaps he ought to have also sued Tennessee ?
I was once deposed in a lawsuit against my then employer for a flight cancelation due to weather (after a lengthy delay), that the plaintiff claimed caused them to miss meeting some vendor from overseas in another city and adversely harmed his business (mind you he connected through that other city on the ticket he bought on another airline the next day). Wanted a few hundred thousand dollars. His attorney, who probably has been on the spine of a phone book at some point, was quite fascinating to talk to when we waited for judges or arbitrators or whatnot… telling me about going into strip clubs to get money from clients.
Their position was the airline didn’t cancel due to weather, but some other issue, and should have known about the weather’s impact and taken care of him in a more timely manner. The weather was a storm and 60mph winds at Las Vegas. Not something that happens too often, and can have rolling disruptions. The attorney subpoenaed basically all of the airline’s dispatch/operations control communications for that day concerning flights in/out of LAS and his destination. The discovery was masses of information. I got to be deposed several times to answer questions about them. Good luck deciphering all that… and that amount of raw information can be used to paint whatever suit or defense you want.
Were the lawyer’s clients strippers? If not, why would he go to a strip club to get money from his clients? I’m trying to figure what I’m missing here.
The strip club, I’m sorry “cabaret”, owners I believe.
It’s because of A-holes like this that the seatbelt sign comes on within 5 seconds of the slightest hint of turbulence.
… and our system allowing to sue for any bs…
Matthew, you may be an attorney, but you need to understand how things work here in Texas. In Texas, when things go your way, you’re have nobody to thank but yourself. When things don’t go your way, it isn’t your fault, and you blame (or sue) anyone you can. For more clarity, I’d recommend you read the following court cases:
Cruz v. Cancun
Paxton v. College, Electoral
Crenshaw v. Everything
Jackson-Lee v. City of Houston
@Jerry … +1 … funny .
Amen to that… Texas even has a governor who sued a homeowner and tree company for injuries he sustained while jogging and who is estimated to collect over $9M over the life of the settlement. However, as AG then Governor Mr. Abbot and a group known as Texans for Lawsuit Reform have legislated closing the very statute that allowed Mr. Abbot to secure his financial security for life. Texas operates under a “I got mine but I’ll make sure you can’t get yours…” social construct; it’s a Texas thing.
Ignoring common sense is always someone else’s fault, right Karen/Ken?
@DavidMiller … +1 .
John and Sebastian is that you?
They should sue the passenger for defamation. And force him into bankruptcy what a ln obtuse loser
Can Lufthansa counter sue for being stupid?
I´m with the Texan here. When I flew Lufthansa very regularly across the pond we´d get into hogwild turbulence a lot more often than I later experienced on other airlines, e.g. Air Canada, United, Delta or KLM which I flew on the same route.
I am convinced, even though I can of course not prove it, that LH sort of recklessly flies through even severe turbulence to fly a more direct route and save on fuel and whatever. Very much done with LH.
I leave mine on and try to encourage my daughter as well. Nonetheless, I marvel at an age when over 40 years of flight I have never encountered significant turbulence beyond having to hold a drink to keep it from spilling. The pilots are amazing.
Send me this Kevin I will aligned his back. Cheap A Loch! Trying to get money where he can.
@Matthew – with respect, your statement on German law itself is „quatsch.“
Art. 2 Abs. 1 GG – Allgemeines Persönlichkeitsrecht is the constitutional basis in Germany for privacy, and rights related to privacy, including images taken of oneself. At a minimum, one is only allowed to take photos and images of people who are consenting, even in public spaces. Publishing photos of people without their consent is punishable by law §§ 22, 32 Kunstuhrhebergesetz with a fine or up to a year in prison (even the photo you used in this blog entry would be considered a violation of all these peoples privacy, who would have the right of legal recourse against you for publishing it on this blog). The DSGVO also applies.
Furthermore, during accidents, the taking of photos of people who are helpless, i.e. during or after accidents, is punishable by up to two years in prison § 201a I Nr. 2 StGB, as is their publication (§ 201a I Nr 4 StGB). Art. 3 I of the Tokyo Convention, which gives the registration state competence to exercise jurisdiction over offences committed onboard, means German law still applies in this case. All this does not consider the various contractual obligations passengers enter in with the airline.
The flight crew was right to point out that the taking of images on board of after an accident of injured or dead people is in violation of § 201a I Nr 2 StGB – even if this detail may have been lost in translation to English (I’m not sure Mr Sidahmed speaks German) or not mentioned by the FAs. But I’d wager that is the spirit in which the annoucement was made. There’s probably a company protocol in place that FAs needed to follow.
In the aftermath of accidents in Germany, there is always a public debate on the so called “Gaffer”, private citizens who love nothing more than pull out their smartphone to take a photo or video of an accident, the injured, or the dead. So much so that the Government recently increased the penalties for people who do this, and the courts do not look favorable at all on people who did this.
There is no recovery from greed which the Sidahmed suffer from.What an arsch.
Time for “loser-pays”. Plain and simple.
What if he was wearing a seatbelt? I mean, don’t pilots know how to avoid turbulence?