More than 60 passengers, crew members and air traffic controllers have filed a lawsuit against Denver International Airport and several other parties, alleging that a series of security and supervision failures contributed to a deadly runway incident in May that left one man dead and dozens of others injured or traumatized.
The lawsuit, filed in Denver District Court on Sept. 17, stems from the May 8 incident involving Frontier Airlines Flight 4345. The allegations have not been established in court.
60+ Plaintiffs
Passengers, Crew & Controllers
17 Claims
Including Negligence
Sept. 17
Lawsuit Filed
May 8
Date of the Runway Incident
The May 8 Runway Incident
The Airbus A321neo was preparing to depart for Los Angeles when it struck 41-year-old Michael Mott, who had entered an active runway after breaching the airport’s perimeter fence. Mott was killed, and the flight was forced to abort its takeoff.
On Board
The aircraft was carrying 224 passengers and seven crew members.
Smoke and Engine Fire
Smoke entered the cabin and an engine fire briefly broke out before being extinguished by firefighters.
Injuries
Twelve people reported minor injuries, with five taken to local hospitals.
Wrongful-Death Claim
The lawsuit alleges that the consequences extended beyond the immediate injuries. It claims passenger Silva Ermelinda de Cervantes died eight days after the incident as a result of exposure to smoke and toxic fumes, prompting the plaintiffs to include a wrongful-death claim in the case.
The Weld County Coroner’s Office confirmed that de Cervantes died on May 16 but did not publicly identify the cause of death. The lawsuit’s allegation regarding the cause of death therefore remains a matter for the courts to determine.
Alleged Security Failures
- PerimeterAccording to the complaint, Mott climbed an approximately eight-foot perimeter fence topped with barbed wire before making his way toward Runway 17L.
- DetectionAirport officials had previously said that ground-detection systems generated an alert in the area, but the movement was initially attributed to deer outside the airport perimeter.
- TimingInvestigators determined that roughly two minutes passed between Mott entering the airport grounds and the collision. Airport officials said the short window made intervention difficult.
- The claimThe lawsuit argues that airport personnel and security contractors failed to properly respond to the warning and failed to halt runway operations before the collision. It also claims there had been previous unauthorized intrusions onto airport property.
Who Is Named in the Lawsuit
- The City and County of Denver
- Denver International Airport and several airport officials
- Covenant Aviation Security, responsible for aspects of perimeter security
- A behavioral health organization connected to the facility where Mott had been living
The plaintiffs accuse the defendants of negligence, including failures to monitor the airport boundary, recognize the intrusion and prevent aircraft from operating on the affected runway.
Questions Over Mott’s Care
According to the complaint, Mott had documented mental health concerns, including suicidal concerns, before the incident. He had been placed in a behavioral health residence in Aurora through a state-supported program, and the lawsuit alleges the facility failed to adequately supervise, monitor or account for him.
A subsequent review of the facility identified multiple violations involving patient records, medication management and treatment plans, according to Colorado Public Radio. State officials later said the facility had addressed the violations during a follow-up audit.
The complaint argues that these failures allowed Mott to leave the residence and travel roughly 70 miles to the airport without being detected.
Lasting Impact on Passengers and Crew
Passengers and crew members reported exposure to smoke and engine fumes, injuries during the emergency evacuation and significant psychological distress. Some plaintiffs reportedly have been unable or unwilling to fly since the incident.
The lawsuit contains 17 separate claims and seeks unspecified damages. They include:
Denver Rejects Responsibility
A spokesperson for the Denver City Attorney’s Office described the incident as tragic but said the city does not believe it bears legal responsibility. Covenant Aviation Security and the behavioral health company named in the lawsuit have also been approached for comment.
Meanwhile, the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board continue to investigate the runway incident and the circumstances surrounding the breach. The case is likely to place renewed attention on perimeter security at one of the busiest airports in the United States, as well as on coordination between airport security systems, airport operations and behavioral health providers.
