Fox host: 'Rush to judgement' against American Airlines 
American Airlines is struggling to address the case of a woman who died of apparent heart failure on a flight from Haiti to New York.
Both oxygen and a defibrillator were used in a futile attempt to save the woman. Her cousin is now claiming that the oxygen tanks were empty and the defibrillator was malfunctioning, but American Airlines says both devices were working properly.
Fox News host Megyn Kelly invited two attorneys, David Wohl and Stacy Schneider, to discuss whether the airline can be held liable for the woman's death.
"There's going to have to be an investigation," began Wohl. "It's hard to believe ... that there's a total systems failure. ... But I don't think there's any dispute as to the fact that this woman initially said she couldn't breathe and she was denied oxygen."
Kelly replied that the airline does indeed dispute that, insisting that the flight attendant brought the woman oxygen immediately.
According to American Airlines, oxygen was administered by the attendant within a couple of minutes. Several doctors and nurses, responding to the call for help, then applied a defibrillation unit, but it reported that no shock was warranted. A defibrillator will help with an irregular heartbeat but can do nothing for massive heart failure.
Schneider suggested what might be a more effective line of defense for the airline. "This case looks on its face like it's a gross negligence case, a slam dunk wrongful death suit," she stated. "But ... if she died of natural causes, to the point where any type of first aid administered to her was not going to have an effect in any way on whether she survived ... American Airlines might actually win on that point."
"I don't think this looks like a slam dunk at all," responded Kelly. "I think this is a rush to judgment against American. You guys are accepting the word of the cousin. ... We have to hear from the doctor ... and that guy's not talking."
"Family members tend to want to blame," Kelly went on, sounding at that point more like a spokesperson for the airline than like a neutral reporter. "All we have here is one man's word against American Airlines' word. ... We should not rush to condemn an airline that, by the way, you should know, has led the way when it comes to onboard safety."
This video is from America's Newsroom, broadcast February 26, 2008.
Transcript via closed captions
:: megyn: kelly as court is in session, american airlines -- "kelly' s court" is back in session, insisting they tried to help a passenger who died during a flight. she complained that she could not breathe, her cousin claims that she was denied oxygen at first and then when it was brought the device failed, not once but twice. not only that, he says that the deferred the letter also failed. american airlines is disputing that claim, saying that the tanks and the different later were working. can they be held liable? let' s ask our panel, a defense attorney and a trial attorney. good morning. david, let' s start with you. this is turning into a he said best they said, and american airlines be held liable?
:: there will have to be an investigation. if a suit is filed you can bet that they will hire their own specialists. it is hard to believe that there is a total systems failure as far as emergency medical equipment goes, but the other -- but part of the dispute is that this woman said she could not breathe into was denied oxygen. if that is true that could get them over the hump as far as negligence. but if these tanks are empty, what an extraordinary degree of negligence. and the distributors, since 2005 all airlines have been -- defibrillators, since 2005 all airlines have been required to have these. megyn: to clarify, there is a dispute about whether she was denied oxygen. american released a statement saying that the flight attendant responded "ok, but we usually do not need to treat diabetes with oxygen." "but let me check anyway and i will get back to you." american says that oxygen was then brought. they say that it was working fine, how do we determine that in a court of law? how do you figure that out?
:: the experts are going to come in on both sides, the airline will defend their equivalent, they will be talking about -- their equipment, they will be talking about it being tested, kept in good working condition, those are issues that will come up. what i think is a key point that might be on the side of the airline, although this casebook on its face like a gross -- although this case looks on its face like a gross negligence case, if this woman' s pre- existing medical condition -- which we are not clear on, if she died of natural causes, to the point where any type of first-aid would not have an effect in any way, then there is a causation issue. american airlines might actually win on that point. on the surface, i agree with david. this looks like a slam dunk. megyn: i do not agree with either of you. i do not think this looks like a slam dunk, i think it is a rush to judgment. you are accepting the word of the cousin that nothing was working. because and is not a medical professional, how does he know? -- the cousin is not a medical professional, how does he know? we need to hear from a doctor. that guy is not talking.
:: there is a big dispute here, but you can tell when oxygen tanks are working because you can hear it. megyn: you can tell if you are right next to it but how do you know where he was?
:: i am assuming he was traveling with her. that is what it sounds like, everything he says sounds firsthand. also, pre-existing conditions by definition, emergency medical treatment deals with those. people have heart conditions, diabetes, planes are so isolated 30,000 feet in the air that they have to have emergency medical equipment to deal with this. if there is any malfunction or incompetence in administering that emergency medical aid, the airline will be held liable. megyn: but only if the equipment could have saved the life had been in proper working order.
:: that is the key point, that is where liability will turn, on whether that causation issue can be determined.
 
| 
