## Facts

- Passengers on an American Airlines flight from New York to St. Thomas were injured when the aircraft encountered severe turbulence.
- The crew had some advance awareness of a weather system, illuminated the seatbelt sign, but allegedly did not provide adequate warning or alter the flight path.
- Some passengers were not fully secured by seatbelts and suffered injuries during the turbulence.
- The passengers sued for negligence, alleging failure to take reasonable precautions to avoid turbulence and failure to warn so passengers could protect themselves.
- The cases were consolidated and tried in the District Court of the Virgin Islands, and the jury was instructed under Virgin Islands common-law negligence standards; the jury awarded more than $2 million in damages.
- The airline sought post-trial relief, arguing that federal aviation law supplied the governing standard of care; the district court agreed, held territorial safety standards preempted, and ordered a new trial due to prejudicially erroneous instructions and evidence.
- The district court certified, and the Third Circuit accepted, an interlocutory appeal asking whether federal law preempts air-safety standards while preserving state/territorial damage remedies.

## Issues

1. Whether federal aviation law impliedly preempts state and territorial standards of care in the field of aviation safety.
2. If federal standards of care govern, whether state and territorial tort damage remedies remain available for violations of those federal standards.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit answered both certified questions “yes.”
- It held that federal law impliedly preempts the entire field of aviation safety standards of care.
- It further held that state and territorial tort remedies survive and may be used to recover for breaches of federally supplied standards.
- It affirmed the district court’s preemption analysis supporting a new trial using federal, not territorial, standards of care.

## Legal Principles

- The Federal Aviation Act and related federal regulations occupy the field of aviation safety, displacing state and territorial standards of care that would vary by jurisdiction.
- In aviation-safety tort cases, the applicable duty and standard of care must be derived from federal law and regulations, including at least the prohibition on operating an aircraft “in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.” (14 C.F.R. § 91.13(a)).
- Field preemption of safety standards does not eliminate state or territorial tort damage remedies; such remedies may coexist with federal standards of care.
- The preemption analysis rests on the FAA’s structure and purpose of national uniformity in safety regulation, not on the Airline Deregulation Act’s express preemption of economic regulation.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit held that federal aviation law impliedly preempts all state and territorial standards of care governing aviation safety, but preserves state and territorial tort remedies, requiring juries to apply federal safety standards when deciding negligence claims arising from in-flight injuries.


Abdullah v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 181 F.3d 363 (3d Cir. 1999)