Abadi v. American Airlines Inc.
- Lewis Liman
- 1:23-cv-04033
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Abadi v. American Airlines Group, Judge Liman ordered additional briefing on whether Abadi has standing to pursue disability claims.
Aaron Abadi and the specified airline defendants whose motions or claims were subject to the court’s standing inquiry; Abadi and those defendants were required to submit supplemental briefing.
What happened
In Abadi v. American Airlines Group, Aaron Abadi alleges that airlines violated disability-protection laws by enforcing mask requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite his sensory processing disorder.
The court questioned whether Abadi adequately alleged a concrete injury involving several airlines, including airlines he may not have tried to fly with or from which he was not denied access. The court also noted that the federal mask requirement ended in April 2022.
Judge Liman ordered Abadi to file a supplemental brief addressing standing against specified airlines, and ordered those defendants to respond. The court did not decide the pending motions to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Abadi v. American Airlines Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04033
- Lewis Liman
- Jan. 16, 2024
Background
Aaron Abadi alleges that he has a sensory processing disorder that prevents him from wearing a mask. He sued numerous airlines and other defendants, claiming that they violated federal and state disability-protection laws by following the government’s mask requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The court was considering three groups of fully briefed motions to dismiss: motions by the Domestic Airlines and certain individual defendants; a motion by Silver Airways; and a motion by the Foreign Airlines and one individual defendant. Abadi alleges that more than 50 airlines refused to let him fly without a mask. The court observed, however, that—apart from a few airlines—he did not appear to allege that he tried to fly on the Moving Defendants’ airlines, was denied access to their flights, or plausibly would have bought a ticket from those airlines without their mask policies.
Standing Issue
Standing is the constitutional requirement that a plaintiff show a concrete injury, that the injury was caused by the defendant’s conduct, and that a favorable court decision would likely remedy it. The court has an independent duty to examine standing for each claim and each type of relief requested.
The court stated that it was not clear from the complaint whether Abadi had adequately alleged an injury that was concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent. The opinion also noted Abadi’s allegation that the claimed discrimination continued until shortly after April 18, 2022, when the federal mask requirement ended.
Order
The court ordered Abadi to file, within three weeks of January 16, 2024, a supplemental brief addressing whether he had standing for his claims against Southwest Airlines Co., Silver Airways, Concesionaria Vuela Compania de Aviacion, S.A.P.I. de C.V., Royal Air Maroc, Aerovias de Mexico S.A. de C.V., Transportes Aereos Portugueses, S.A., Spirit Airlines, Inc., Avianca S.A., Singapore Airlines, LATAM Airlines Group S.A., Iberia Lineas Aereas De Espana, S.A., Operadora, Sociedad Unipersonal, and LOT Polish Airlines, S.A. The Moving Defendants were ordered to file a response within two weeks after Abadi’s brief, by February 17, 2024.
The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied any of the pending motions to dismiss. Judge Lewis J. Liman’s order instead required additional briefing on standing.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.