Sorry to go off-topic here, but some people here need to relax before jumping to conclusions about lawsuits that most likely will never happen.
Cmckeithen, you should read more about the McDonald's coffee lawsuit before you make quick judgments. You'll learn that (1) the coffee was much hotter than it should have been--i.e., much hotter than coffee is typically served--and (2) the old woman suffered severe burns all over her inner thighs and genitalia--by all accounts, it was extremely painful. It was really quite appalling--no one has any reason to expect injuries of that magnitude from a normal cup of coffee, even if it accidentally spills in one's lap. McDonald's was in the wrong, and the whole purpose of tort law is to compensate the victims of such wrongs.
In the McDonald's fat case, by contrast, there was no evidence that McDonald's had done anything wrong. Sure enough, the lawsuit was thrown out. Score another for our justice system. It's not perfect, but it's better than most of what's out there.
Back to the topic, in this case, I doubt anyone will sue, and if they do, I doubt they will be successful--unless it turns out, for example, that the pilot or dispatcher chose to disregard warnings of severe turbulence, or that the crew left the seatbelt sign off despite indications of rough air ahead--neither of which seems likely.
Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire