A couple of days ago, I covered a lawsuit whereby a disabled passenger sued American Airlines over a recent experience on a transatlantic flight. She reached out regarding my story, and I have to issue an apology, as I didn’t do justice to the core of the complaint, and that’s my fault.
I promise to try and do better in the future, starting with covering this topic once again, to accurately reflect the claims made. While the United States is known for how litigious it is, and while there are some points here that might seem a little extreme, the reality remains — some airlines show complete disregard for disabled travelers, and that’s not acceptable.
Disabled traveler sues to hold American accountable
A traveler is suing American in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, claiming that the Fort Worth-based airline violated her rights under the Air Carrier Access Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in air travel.
This situation dates back to June 12, 2025, when a woman was traveling with her husband and son from Paris (CDG) to Chicago (ORD). The mother has restrictions on her mobility, which require her to use a powered wheelchair, and her son is autistic.
The traveler tried to use American’s online check-in system, but she claims that the system showed the wrong titles for her son and husband, which “triggered a system lockout that barred her from online check-in and forced her and her family to conduct same-day airport check-in.”
The traveler claims that having to check-in at the airport led to “physical and physiological burden and fatigue, time compression and disruption of medical routines, and risk to pre-arranged disability accommodations.”
Per the complaint, “for individuals with disabilities and their dependents with complex medical or neurodevelopmental needs, such as Plaintiff and her son, advance online check-in is not a discretionary convenience but an essential and protected right under federal law.” Now, as I’ll discuss below, I think that claim is a little questionable. However, that was only the start of the issues, and I think there’s a lot of merit to the other claims made.
While at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport, the traveler requested to speak to a Complaint Resolution Officer (CRO), who is the airline representative with the authority to resolve disability complaints. Per Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, all US airlines, including at outstations, must have a CRO on duty, who is available in-person or by phone. However, this traveler was instead directed to a remote voicemail inbox, asking for “feedback,” and promising a response within 48 hours.
Then upon arrival in Chicago, the airline refused to return her wheelchair directly to the gate. The custom prescription wheelchair (which had been tagged to be returned to the aircraft) was instead delivered to baggage claim, and she was reportedly told that this was due to the wheelchair’s weight.
As a non-ambulatory passenger medically unable to use an alternative chair, she was stranded on the aircraft. She had to educate flight attendants on the rules, and a flight attendant reportedly told her that “most” airlines actually send wheelchairs to baggage claim.
She ended up having to stay on the aircraft, and it took around an hour for her wheelchair to be recovered, and to be brought where it needed to be. Per the complaint, “the Defendant’s actions caused Plaintiff substantial and foreseeable harm, including physical pain, humiliation, emotional trauma, and a documented medical decompensation in the weeks following the flight.”
In response to the incident, American offered the traveler a $75 travel credit, which was considered to be “grossly inadequate and insulting.” She then filed a complaint with the DOT, and received a response that “contained a self-incriminating admission whereby the Defendant quoted the federal regulation requiring immediate access to a Complaint Resolution Officer (CRO) while simultaneously describing its own non-compliant actions.”
American then retained external legal counsel to defend its behavior. Per the complaint, “the letter confessed that it is ‘not uncommon’ for the airline to unlawfully divert heavy wheelchairs to baggage claim, confirming a systematic disregard for federal law.”
The lawsuit argues that what happened constitutes an “accident” under the Montreal Convention:
“Pursuant to Article 17 of the Montreal Convention, the Defendant is liable for damages sustained in case of bodily injury of a passenger caused by an ‘accident’ taking place on board the aircraft or in the course of embarking or disembarking. The Defendant’s unlawful diversion of the Plaintiff’s medically necessary wheelchair, refusal to return it to the aircraft door, and the creation of a hostile and unsafe environment constituted an “accident.” This accident caused the Plaintiff to suffer bodily injury, including physical and emotional distress, cardiovascular instability, and severe medical decompensation, which was foreseeably and significantly exacerbated by the acute distress she experienced while being forced to witness both the emotional harm inflicted upon her disabled minor son and the overt hostility directed at her husband by the Defendant’s personnel.”
This reflects a systematic issue for disabled travelers
The United States is of course incredibly litigious, and people like to poke fun at the extent to which people make claims of “emotional distress,” or whatever. However, it’s also important to hold major corporations accountable, especially for repeated failures.
Disabled travelers face a variety of challenges that many of us could never imagine, and I can appreciate the need for them to advocate for their rights. After all, most publicly traded companies don’t actually care about people, and they’ll only do things that positively help their bottom line.
Going in chronological order, the one thing I take issue with is regarding the claim that “advance online check-in is not a discretionary convenience but an essential and protected right under federal law.” As far as I know, that’s simply not correct.
For example, if someone is selected for additional screening (which is outside of a carrier’s control, and you’ll know based on “SSSS” being written on the boarding pass), then online check-in is blocked. Even when an airline offers online check-in, there are other situations where it might not work, like when documents need to be verified. For that matter, some airlines flying to the United States don’t even offer online check-in.
It’s possible I’m missing something, but I don’t see how guaranteed online check-in can be considered a federally protected right.
That being said, regarding everything else, I think the traveler is 100% correct. Keep in mind that in late 2024, American was fined $50 million for its disregard for passengers with wheelchairs. Per the DOT notice at the time:
“The Department finds that American failed in numerous cases to provide passengers with disabilities using wheelchairs with adequate enplaning, deplaning, and connecting assistance, including assistance in moving within the terminal. Specifically, American failed in numerous cases to provide adequate wheelchair assistance to passengers with disabilities from 2019 to 2023, which in some cases resulted in injury to passengers. OACP considers inadequate wheelchair assistance to include untimely assistance, unsafe physical assistance, and undignified assistance. In addition, from 2019 to 2023, passengers reported that American mishandled thousands of passengers’ wheelchairs and scooters by damaging them or delaying their timely return.”
While those of us without disabilities might not be familiar with them, the regulations here are straightforward — airlines need to give disabled travelers access to a Complaint Resolution Officer, and they need to return wheelchairs to aircraft, if that’s where they’re requested.
American is not following those regulations. Period. According to the lawsuit, the legal counsel that American retained claimed that it’s “not uncommon” for wheelchairs to be diverted to baggage claim, but that’s not something that federal regulations allow for.
So how do you hold a major corporation accountable when it’s not following laws, despite having already been fined $50 million for these exact types of violations in the past? This is probably the only realistic way to do so…
Bottom line
A disabled traveler is suing American Airlines over a recent flight from Paris to Chicago, where she claims the airline violated the Air Carrier Access Act. Crucially, it seems that American didn’t make a Complaint Resolution Officer available, and also refused to return her wheelchair to the gate, instead sending it to baggage claim.
While mistakes happen, it’s clear that American has some systematic issues with looking after travelers with disabilities. The fact that both flight attendants and American’s own communication claimed that wheelchairs are sometimes sent to baggage claims contradicts what the law requires.
Under a year ago, American was fined $50 million for the disregard shown to those with wheelchairs. So I think there’s a lot of merit to this case, and lawsuits are probably the only way to bring about change.
What do you make of this lawsuit against American?
Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.