They are entitled to actual damages plus a little bit for trauma or whatever.
No, Greg, they are not "entitled" to anything.
Duty, Breach, Cause, Injury - the mantra of torts. You have to have a duty to the plaintiff, which duty was breached, which breach was the proximate cause of an actual injury.
I think they will have one helluva time trying to prove any duty which was breached here.
Plaintiffs' lawyers often like to simply sue, hoping- expecting- that insurers will pay out a sum of money which is less than the cost of defense, which (of course) creates a payday for the lawyers and their clients. Many defendants will settle out in this way, sometimes with settlements made by insurance carriers despite their insured's objection (allowed by most insurance policies), giving rise to the expectation in the plaintiffs' bar of similar behavior in future cases.
Now.
Some companies have policies against nuisance / cost-of-defense settlements, on the grounds that the practice of doing so encourages more suits of similar nature, and for those who consistently adhere to this policy, the long-term effect can be excellent- no lawyers want to take these cases!
An example would be Wal-Mart, who have a very good policy of dealing with claims of injuries at their properties; if someone is injured at a Wal-Mart store, Wal-Mart will immediately arrange for treatment, will investigate and, if they believe that they were at fault, will make a fair offer of settlement. But, if the offer is turned-down or if they believe that they are simply not at fault, they will not pay off the complainant, and if suit is filed, the Plaintiffs' bar knows that the case
will go to trial. As a result, unless it is a slam-dunk case of negligence (and very few are), no lawyer wants the case, because the plaintiffs' bar relies upon settling nearly every case, and trying very few. Some plaintiffs' lawyers never try cases.
---
In this case, presuming the investigation confirms what we all suspect - that US did nothing at all wrong - US Airways should not pay off one thin dime to anyone (other than the voluntary compensation they have been paying to every passenger, which I believe is a marvelous show of goodwill), and should fight any suits which might be filed vigorously; to do otherwise would always be regarded as a tacit admission of wrongdoing, and
there is none!
Sometimes, stuff happens, and sometimes, it's not anyone's fault.
I genuinely believe that the airlines should maintain a list of known plaintiffs, and decline to offer air transport to them.
"I'm sorry sir, but our records indicate that you sued US Airways for having an accident caused by events and circumstances entirely outside their control. As a result, we have evaluated the risk of having you on-board and decided that your business is more risk than we can afford. You can call Greyhound at 1-800-231-2222. Have a nice day."
That I see constant ads from lawyers pretty much saying if your kid didn't turn out perfect from birth or you have a parent in a nursing home you can collect, proves the legal system is totally out of whack with reality.
I wonder why any doctor would stay in OB GYN practice.
...
Fewer and fewer are, Mike.
) as to what the realities of this type of case are. I just hope that every lawyer contacted in this, and all subsequent cases is as righteous as you that all these absurdly wasteful claims may eventually stop. 
Stranger things have happened!
