A United Airlines flight attendant who was seriously injured when she took a tumble at a crew layover hotel was ordered to pay the Chicago-based carrier nearly $22,000 to cover its legal fees fighting a disability discrimination lawsuit, when United’s attorneys pursued taxation of costs against her.
The ex-crew member, who worked for United for around six years before she was unexpectedly terminated in 2022, is now in a David vs. Goliath battle with United in an attempt to convince the court that she should not be required to pay the airline any legal fees.
Yihsing Tien was employed as a flight attendant by United in 2013, and during her career, she says she was a high-performing crew member who had no disciplinary offenses recorded against her.
In late 2018, during a layover at a crew layover hotel, Tien says she fell over, seriously injuring both of her knees, her left elbow, left shoulder, and left wrist. Tien required surgery and had to be placed on medical leave while she recovered.
According to Tien’s complaint against United, she received a letter from United saying that she had been granted a medical leave of absence until the end of January 2023. It turned out, however, unbeknownst to Tien, that the date on this letter was incorrect.
In fact, the maximum leave of absence permitted under the United flight attendant contract was three years, meaning that she had to return to work by the end of January 2022 or be terminated.
During her time away from the airline, Tien says United never once contacted her to discuss how she might be able to return to work. The first contact she had with United was in January 2022, when she received a letter informing her that she was being terminated.
Tien fought to try to get her job back, arguing that if she had known the correct end date of the leave of absence was January 2022, then she could have tried to return to work or find reasonable accommodations to facilitate her return.
United dismissed her appeal, saying she should have been able to do the math on when the leave of absence was due to end.
Tien sued United in a California district court, alleging disability discrimination and retaliation, but the airline managed to convince the court to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that Tien had failed to properly state a claim.
United then moved to claim costs against Tien. The court initially taxed costs against Tien at $21,926.
Tien remains unemployed and went back to the court, asking that it reverse the taxation of costs decision. The first appeal saw the clerk of the court reduce the cost amount to $12,516.
Tien again appealed, arguing that even this amount would cause her severe financial hardship. Last week, the court ruled that the taxation of costs should be fully reviewed.
Explaining the court’s decision, Judge Jeffrey White said he would approve Tien’s application for a review given the “Plaintiff’s limited means, the issues raised in the litigation reflecting the public interest, and the potential of chilling important civil rights litigation.”
In one of the most recent submissions to the court, attorneys acting for the now 51-year-old ex-flight attendant said Tien “did not lose because her claims were frivolous — five of nine causes of action survived United’s motion to dismiss.”
“The ultimate result turned on narrow factual distinctions rather than legal insufficiency. She lost because United’s reliance on the terms of the collective bargaining agreement proved dispositive in a close and contested record.”
The brief added: “Now United Airlines, Inc. — a carrier that reported $59.1 billion in operating revenue in fiscal year 2025 — seeks $21,926.34 in costs from the woman who worked as its flight attendant.”
“The amount United seeks represents approximately 0.000037% of its annual revenue — the financial equivalent of rounding error to a corporation of this scale.”
