Gemini on Question 48, Sep 28

Yes, Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co., Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019) is still good law. It has not been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, nor has it been overruled en banc by the Eleventh Circuit. It remains binding precedent within the Eleventh Circuit (which covers Alabama, Florida, and Georgia) and serves as persuasive authority in other jurisdictions.

Brief Context

The case involves the interpretation of the Montreal Convention, an international treaty that governs airline liability. Specifically, it addresses Article 17, which holds airlines liable for passenger injuries caused by an "accident." The plaintiff in this case suffered from deep vein thrombosis (DVT) during a long flight, and the flight crew allegedly failed to provide him with requested medical assistance or allow him to move to a seat with more legroom. The legal question was whether a flight crew's inaction (failure to act) during a medical emergency could be considered an "accident."

The Holding

Relying on U.S. Supreme Court precedent (Air France v. Saks and Olympic Airways v. Husain), the Eleventh Circuit concluded that a crew's failure to act can indeed be an "accident" if that failure is an unexpected or unusual departure from industry standards or airline policy.

The court articulated its holding as follows:

"We hold that a flight crew’s unexpected and unusual response to a passenger’s medical emergency can constitute an 'accident' under Article 17 of the Montreal Convention." (925 F.3d at 1341)

Elaborating further on how "inaction" fits into this definition, the court stated:

"[W]e conclude that an airline crew’s inaction in the face of a passenger’s medical emergency can be an 'accident' if the crew's failure to act was an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger." (925 F.3d at 1346)

Because the plaintiff presented evidence that the flight crew's failure to assist him violated standard airline industry practices, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the airline, allowing the plaintiff's case to proceed.