Federal jury orders American Airlines to pay $9.6 million in stroke case tied to failure to divert flight

A federal jury in San Jose found American Airlines liable for failing to follow its own health and safety protocols during a November 2021 international flight from Miami to Madrid, a decision that awarded $9.6 million in damages to a California chef and his wife after he suffered two debilitating strokes on board. The verdict, reached Thursday, established liability under the Montreal Convention, the international treaty governing air travel. The case centered on whether airline staff acted in accordance with established procedures to obtain medical help and consider diverting the flight when Jesus Plasencia showed clear signs of a medical emergency before and during the trip.

Plasencia, 67, was traveling with his wife, Ana Maria Marcela Tavantzis, on what was supposed to be a dream vacation when he experienced what the lawsuit described as a “mini stroke” shortly before the Miami–to–Madrid flight was due to depart in November 2021. The complaint alleges he briefly lost the ability to speak and to grip objects such as his phone. Tavantzis alerted a flight attendant and the pilot, but she contends the crew dismissed her concerns and even joked with Plasencia before the plane took off. The airline’s policy, the suit says, requires staff to alert medical personnel, a step the pilot allegedly did not take.

After takeoff, the complaint states, Plasencia suffered a second, more severe stroke while the cabin crew reportedly asked other passengers to monitor him rather than notifying the pilot. The flight eventually landed in Spain, where he remained hospitalized for three weeks of treatment before returning to the United States. The lawsuit asserts that the crew’s failure to follow protocols deprived Plasencia of timely care, potentially worsening his condition and long-term prognosis. Plasencia now cannot speak or write and relies on around-the-clock in-home care and intensive rehabilitation, according to court documents. The suit contends that had staff complied with airline protocols, Plasencia could have had a better outcome.

The jury’s decision found American Airlines liable for its employees’ disregard for company protocol in the incident and awarded $9.6 million to the couple. The verdict was delivered under the Montreal Convention, which governs liability for international carriage by air. While the jury found in favor of the plaintiffs under that treaty, American Airlines said it plans to contest the ruling and evaluate next steps. In a statement, the airline said, “The safety and well-being of our passengers is our highest priority. While we respect the jury’s decision, we disagree with the verdict and are currently evaluating next steps.”

The case adds to a broader pattern of litigation over how airlines respond to medical emergencies onboard. Plasencia’s lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2023 and demonstrates the potential legal exposure airlines face when crew members fail to initiate medical protocols or consider diverting a flight to seek urgent care for a passenger in distress. Critics say the outcome underscores the importance of clear duty-of-care standards and robust staff training for inflight medical events, particularly on long international journeys where time to medical attention is constrained.

In a separate but related note, American Airlines faced a separate but not identical lawsuit in 2017 over a stroke victim who allegedly wandered into traffic while boarding at JFK International Airport. The complaint described a series of events in which the airline was said to have failed to monitor a distraught passenger, leading to a near-miss with oncoming traffic. The 2017 incident has been cited in court filings and press coverage as context for ongoing debates about airline medical protocols and passenger safety, though it did not culminate in the same damages verdict as the Plasencia case.

The outcome here highlights a continuing tension between international liability frameworks and airline policy, as airlines seek to balance on-board safety, civil liability, and the practicalities of long-haul travel. The Montreal Convention sets the framework for compensating victims in international travel, but juries and courts still must interpret whether airline staff complied with company procedures and whether those procedures were adequate to protect passenger health during emergencies. The plaintiffs’ lawyers argued that American’s failure to follow its own policies cost Plasencia the chance of better recovery, while the defense emphasized the constraints of inflight decision-making and the difficulty of gauging medical risk from a passenger during a brief period of time in the cabin.

The airline said it remains committed to safety and plans to pursue all available remedies. The verdict does not necessarily end the legal process; the company could appeal the decision and challenge the damages calculation or the application of the Montreal Convention to the facts as presented.

The Plasencia case underscores the real-world stakes of inflight medical decisions. Plasencia, who now requires constant, professional care, represents a challenging case of what can happen when an unanticipated medical emergency arises at cruising altitude and the standard operating procedures are not promptly activated. The family’s attorneys have argued that the jury’s verdict sends a clear message that airlines must adhere to their own safety protocols to protect passengers, particularly on long international routes where medical staff can be hours away.

As the case moves forward, observers say the focus is likely to remain on whether airlines’ inflight medical protocols are sufficiently robust, how quickly cabin crew members escalate medical concerns, and how flight crews weigh the decision to divert a plane in response to a medical emergency. The Plasencia matter is likely to influence future training programs and may prompt airlines to review their procedures for obtaining timely medical advice and for communicating with pilots about potential diversions on international legs. In the meantime, Jesus Plasencia’s condition remains severe, with ongoing rehabilitation and support needs that affect both him and his family as they navigate a protracted recovery path.