Airline Blames 9-Year-Old Girl For Being Secretly Recorded In Bathroom

[Kukuforguns]

I knew of one case where a screwup by the defense counsel, or, more exactly, their expert witness, cost well into seven figures for a claim that was maybe worth fifty grand.

Which is a way of saying that this screwup is going to cost AA's insurer and insurance counsel a lot of money. I doubt if AA, itself, will pay out a dime.

Here the plaintiffs filed suit against the airline and the steward.

Virtually all liability policies exclude coverage for intentional acts. Sex abuse cases (dentists using laughing gas) are one of the categories where this exclusion becomes relevant. Typically, plaintiff's counsel gets around this exclusion by alleging the defendant negligently or intentionally committed harmful actions. I don't know how the claims are pleaded in this action.

Some liability policies provide coverage for the actions of employees (typically acting within the course and scope of their employment).

Suing both the airline and the steward is interesting, because the steward's assets likely are wholly inadequate to cover the damages. Moreover, there is very likely a conflict of interest between the steward and the airline and maybe between the airline and its insurer.

Questions:
Is the steward an insured under AA's insurance?
Who is paying for the steward's defense?
Who is representing the airline and the steward?

Insurers sometimes play hardball with insurance coverage in sex abuses cases, and expect insureds to contribute to settlement.

But, we'll never know who funds the settlement. There will be a confidentiality provision.

[DMF13]

I am not a lawyer but why are the family suing AA in this matter? Unless the company knew that the creep FA was doing this and did not take action, I don't see how AA had responsibility.

Gringop

Because said creep has shallow pockets, and AA has deep pockets. The family, and their counsel, know they can't get much if anything out of the former, and might get a bunch of money out of the latter.

[jh9]

Because said creep has shallow pockets, and AA has deep pockets. The family, and their counsel, know they can't get much if anything out of the former, and might get a bunch of money out of the latter.

Why is that a problem, though? It is literally the only lever you, as a private individual, have against these megacorps to get them to change their behavior. You can't send a corporation to prison, and the "corporate death penalty" will never get used. You have to make them bleed cash. It has to be enough to impact an earnings call. There's nothing short of having the CEO tell a room full of investors the reason they're seeing Red Numbers instead of Green Numbers is because of XYZ to get them to actually do something about XYZ. In this case maybe give fewer repeat sex offenders unrestricted access to the lav. But the generality holds. Money is the only thing they understand.

The actual offender here doesn't have the cash necessary but you can smash his dick flat with a claw hammer and on top of the cash from the airline that should be a good start.

[mmc45414]

Questions:
Is the steward an insured under AA's insurance?
Who is paying for the steward's defense?
Who is representing the airline and the steward?

The Steward is probably in a union also, and wonder if that might have implications, like if AA had tried to fire him prior and the union helped secure his job?