## Facts

- Gregory Langadinos flew on an American Airlines international flight from Boston to Paris on June 13, 1996.
- During the flight, another passenger, Christopher Debord, allegedly behaved conspicuously toward Langadinos and later sexually assaulted him while Langadinos waited for the lavatory, causing severe pain.
- Langadinos reported the incident to the flight crew and alleged the crew responded inadequately; Debord was not detained upon arrival.
- Langadinos sued American asserting (1) a common-law tort claim and (2) a Warsaw Convention claim alleging American continued serving alcohol to Debord despite his visible intoxication and aggressive behavior.
- Portions of the alcohol-service allegations were pleaded “on information and belief.”

## Issues

1. Whether the amended complaint failed to state a Warsaw Convention claim under Rule 12(b)(6) because key allegations were pleaded “on information and belief” and lacked detailed facts showing how flight attendants knew of Debord’s intoxication and conduct.

## Decision

- The First Circuit vacated the district court’s Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal and remanded.
- The court held the amended complaint satisfied Rule 8’s “short and plain statement” requirement.
- The court ruled that “information and belief” allegations describing specific conduct may be treated as well-pleaded facts at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
- The court concluded the district court improperly demanded heightened factual specificity and discounted the pleaded facts.
- Accepting the allegations as true and drawing reasonable inferences for Langadinos, the complaint stated a viable theory of liability under the Warsaw Convention.

## Legal Principles

- On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, courts must accept well-pleaded factual allegations as true and draw reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor; dismissal is proper only when recovery is not possible on any viable theory consistent with the pleaded facts.
- Rule 8 does not require detailed evidentiary facts; requiring a plaintiff to explain, at the pleading stage, how the plaintiff will prove a defendant’s knowledge imposes an improper heightened pleading standard.
- Allegations made “on information and belief” are not automatically conclusory; when they assert specific conduct and conditions, they can suffice to state a claim and must be assumed true at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
- A pleaded in-flight assault allegedly facilitated by an airline’s continued alcohol service to a visibly intoxicated passenger can constitute an “accident” occurring during international carriage sufficient to support a Warsaw Convention theory, if proved.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit held that Langadinos’s amended complaint plausibly alleged a Warsaw Convention claim under Rule 8 despite using “information and belief” allegations, and it vacated the dismissal because the district court required more factual detail than federal pleading rules demand.


Langadinos v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 199 F.3d 68 (1st Cir. 2000)