Aviation Law | International Liability | Personal Injury

Aviation Law: A Coffee Spill Turns Into a Multimillion-Dollar Lawsuit

Aymara Corbo, a 78-year-old woman from Queens, New York, has filed a $10 million lawsuit against Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) following a painful in-flight incident in April 2024. According to court filings, Corbo alleges she was severely burned after a flight attendant accidentally spilled scalding hot coffee onto her lap during a flight from Copenhagen to Oslo.

The complaint, filed in federal court in New York, states that the coffee caused second-degree burns to Corbo’s thighs and groin area, resulting in “serious physical injury, extreme pain, disfigurement, emotional distress, and long-term impairment.” The lawsuit further alleges that the beverage was served at an unsafe temperature, constituting negligence on the part of SAS crew members.

Her husband, Giuseppe Corbo, has also joined the complaint, seeking an additional $1 million in damages for loss of consortium.

International Liability: The Montreal Convention in Focus

The case hinges on the application of the Montreal Convention, the treaty that governs international air carrier liability for injuries sustained onboard aircraft. Under the Convention, airlines are strictly liable for bodily injury caused by accidents on international flights, but total damages can exceed the liability cap if plaintiffs can show the airline’s conduct was reckless or intentionally harmful.

Here, the Corbos’ legal team is arguing that SAS demonstrated gross negligence by serving coffee at dangerously high temperatures and failing to follow adequate safety procedures. The plaintiffs are also expected to claim that the carrier failed to provide prompt medical assistance upon landing—another possible factor supporting the claim of willful misconduct.

Legal observers note that if the court finds a breach of safety protocols or improper training of in-flight personnel, it could open the door to more expansive interpretations of the Montreal Convention’s liability provisions.

Personal Injury: A Familiar Legal Burn

This case recalls the landmark Liebeck v. McDonald’s lawsuit from 1992, in which a New Mexico woman was awarded nearly $3 million (later reduced) after suffering third-degree burns from spilled coffee. Though often parodied in pop culture, that case had a lasting legal legacy, influencing how businesses assess product safety and warning obligations.

Similarly, airlines are increasingly under pressure to mitigate risks posed by in-flight service items. Previous lawsuits against Delta Air Lines and others involving hot beverage burns suggest that this is a recurring hazard in cramped, unpredictable cabin environments.

Experts point out that while turbulence and accidental spills are inevitable, the standard of care airlines owe to passengers includes minimizing foreseeable risks—especially those involving injury-prone service like hot liquids.

Conclusion

As Corbo v. SAS unfolds, legal professionals will watch closely for judicial interpretation of international air carrier liability and how U.S. courts balance treaty obligations with state tort principles. This case may not just test Scandinavian Airlines’ defense strategy—it could set new expectations for in-flight safety in the airline industry at large.