United States: "You Like ‘To-May-Toe,’ I Like ‘To-Mah-Toe’" — Distinctions Without A Material Difference: Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court Rejection Of ATSA Immunity

The events of September 11 were by no means the first examples of terrorism involving aviation, but they unified the U.S., if not the world, in its effort to make air travel safer. It was in the wake of 9/11 that Congress enacted the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA), pursuant to which the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was created. Among its provisions, the ATSA gave airlines immunity against civil liability for reporting suspicious behavior in an effort to ensure that the TSA would be informed of potential threats.

On January 27, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper,1 in which it relied upon the ATSA's immunity provision to reverse a $1.2 million defamation verdict against Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. This decision represents a major victory for air carriers, and the safety of air travel as a whole. The decision is especially welcome in the wake of the Supreme Court's disappointing decision not to grant certiorari in Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Eid,2 which involved the Tokyo Convention's provision of immunity to a Captain's actions to ensure the safety of an aircraft during international operation.

William Hoeper had been working for Air Wisconsin for six years when, in 2004, he was required to get certificated on a new aircraft to continue operating out of his home base. After failing three proficiency tests, which in itself was cause for dismissal, Hoeper agreed with Air Wisconsin that he would receive one final chance to pass the test, all but guaranteeing that he would be terminated if he failed.

In December 2004, Hoeper flew to Virginia for the simulator component of the test. Hoeper had difficulty in the simulator and, realizing that he was likely to fail, "blew up" at the instructor and terminated the test. The instructor reported Hoeper's behavior to another Air Wisconsin employee, who then discussed it with others at the company. The Air Wisconsin employees, knowing that Hoeper was going to be flying home that day and recalling prior instances where disgruntled airline employees caused or nearly caused air disasters, became increasingly concerned that Hoeper might pose a threat to the flight. Their fears were exacerbated by the fact that Hoeper was a Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO), which increased the risk that he could be carrying a firearm on the flight.

The Air Wisconsin employees decided that the TSA should be apprised of the situation. Patrick Doyle, an Air Wisconsin employee, made the call. The jury concluded that Doyle advised the TSA that Hoeper "was an FFDO who may be armed," that the airline was "concerned about his mental stability and the whereabouts of his firearm," and that an "[u]nstable pilot in [the] FFDO program was terminated today."

As a result of this report, the TSA boarded the plane and removed Hoeper. After questioning him and confirming that his gun was at his home, Hoeper was permitted to fly later that day. He was fired by Air Wisconsin the following day.

Hoeper commenced a lawsuit against Air Wisconsin in Colorado asserting several causes of action, including defamation, and Air Wisconsin moved for summary judgment based on ATSA immunity. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §44941, carriers are immune for reports to the TSA unless the carrier "made the disclosure with actual knowledge that the disclosure was false, inaccurate, or misleading" or "with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity." The trial court denied Air Wisconsin's motion and submitted the immunity issue to the jury, which found for Hoeper and awarded him $849,625 in compensatory damages and $391,875 in punitive damages.3

The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, holding that the ATSA immunity issue was properly submitted to the jury, the record supported the jury's rejection of immunity and the evidence was sufficient to support the defamation verdict. The Colorado Supreme Court also affirmed. Although the Colorado Supreme Court held that the issue of ATSA immunity was a question of law that should have been determined by the court, it held that this error was harmless because Air Wisconsin was not entitled to immunity.

In a footnote that provided the impetus for the Supreme Court's review, the Colorado Supreme Court found that it did not have to decide whether Air Wisconsin's report was true or false because Air Wisconsin made the report with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity — in other words, the court held that a report made recklessly is not entitled to immunity even if it is substantially true.

The Colorado Supreme Court then compounded this error by engaging in a hairsplitting analysis comparing Air Wisconsin's actual statements to statements that the court determined would have been permissible. The following side-by-side analysis reflects the statements the Colorado Supreme Court found unacceptable with those that would be acceptable:

Not Acceptable (What Air Wisconsin Said) Acceptable (What Air Wisconsin Should Have Said)
"[Hoeper] was terminated today" "[Hoeper] knew he would be terminated soon"
"[Hoeper] was an FFDO who may be armed" "[Hoeper ]was an FFDO pilot"
"[W]e were concerned about his mental stability" "[Hoeper] had acted irrationally at the training three hours earlier and 'blew up' at the test administrators"

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether ATSA immunity could be denied without a determination that the carrier's disclosure was materially false. To all involved, and presumably all who closely followed the case, the Court's unanimous opinion holding that ATSA immunity could not be denied without such a finding came as no surprise. What was far less certain, but of no less importance, was whether the Supreme Court would address the Colorado high court's finding that the report made by Air Wisconsin was false — i.e., whether it would evaluate whether Air Wisconsin was entitled to immunity under the facts of this case. This was of vital importance because, if the Supreme Court decided not to address whether the report was materially false, and the Colorado Supreme Court's hair-splitting analysis was allowed to stand, the Court's decision would provide carriers no real protection at all, rendering the "victory" a pyrrhic one.

In a welcome turn of events, a majority of the Supreme Court decided to address this issue and held that Air Wisconsin's report was not materially false. In an opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Court first rejected Hoeper's argument that the requisite material falsity analysis had been performed as part of the lower courts' review of the jury's defamation verdict, holding that the proper ATSA immunity analysis required a determination of "whether a falsehood affects the authorities' perception of and response to a given threat"— i.e., a falsehood is not material unless there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable security officer would consider it important in determining the proper response to a supposed threat.

In finding that the distinctions made by the Colorado Supreme Court were as a matter of law immaterial to the ATSA immunity analysis, the Court stressed that "Congress meant to give air carriers 'breathing space' to report potential threats to security officials without fear of civil liability for a few inaptly chosen words."

Perhaps the most important aspect of the Court's opinion is its keen understanding that these reports often must be made without time to investigate or formulate a perfect script, and guidance that airlines and their employees must be given substantial leeway in the language chosen for a report. It is exactly this leeway, or deference, that the Ninth Circuit failed to give to the airline Captain's decision to remove unruly and potentially dangerous passengers in Eid, where it imposed a duty to investigate and interpreted the Tokyo Convention's immunity provisions in a manner contrary to both the Convention's goals and the parties' intent.4

The Court's decision in Hoeper will promote the reporting of suspicious activities, thereby increasing the safety of air travel. Moreover, it indicates the Court's understanding of the deference that must be given to those who must act or report quickly in the face of a potential danger to air travel, which hopefully is a harbinger of good things to come — specifically, a proper, more deferential interpretation of the Tokyo Convention's immunity provisions as well as those provided by other provisions of U.S. law.


1. Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 571 U.S. ______ (2014) (slip op).

2. Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Eid, Docket No. 10-962.

3. The punitive damages award was reduced to $350,000, making the total award just less than $1.2 million.

4. As readers may recall, in Eid, the Captain diverted an Alaska Airlines flight and delivered several passengers to authorities because a flight attendant informed him over the intercom that she had lost control of the cabin while dealing with these passengers. While there may have been some question as to whether the flight attendant acted appropriately, there was no dispute that the Captain had no knowledge of the events occurring in the cabin outside of the flight attendant's report.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions