Simviation Forums

I noticed this on the Ticker tape, I just love the last sentance.
Aviation liability

Matt

That is going to be a interesting case!

If successful this case could have serious repercussions on the industry. As if the economic situation is not bad enough already. I thought this product liability nonsense had been sorted out back in 1994. http://www.designnews.com/article/10127-Engineering_News.php

" Cessna Aircraft ceased making piston-powered airplanes in 1986; Piper Aircraft slipped into Chapter 11 in 1991; Beech Aircraft spent an average of $530,000 defending itself in 203 accident cases in which the NTSB concluded that the aircraft's design and manufacture were not a factor.

"The average age of the GA fleet is 27 years," says Ed Stimpson, president of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA). "We were getting sued on 30-, 40-, and 50-year-old airplanes." He jests that, prior to the legislation, had a pilot crashed the original Wright Flyer he could have sued the Wright Brothers for design defects--92 years after the aircraft was built."

Seems it was "adequately designed for its intended purpose" for a good 58 years. Unless they can come up with other instances to back this up I'd say they are bobbing for apples here.

[quote]Seems it "adequately designed for its intended purpose" for a good 58 years. Unless they can come up with other instances to back this up I'd say they are bobbing for apples here.

[quote][quote]Seems it "adequately designed for its intended purpose" for a good 58 years. Unless they can come up with other instances to back this up I'd say they are bobbing for apples here.

I think every court, company, school, and well, anything where a group of adults make decisions, employ an average 5 year old. The job of this child will be to say something whenever he hears something silly.

Also in my world, the only costs incurred by the defendants in a case like this would be however much it costs them to have an intern drive to the court from the nearest office, say to the judge "The NTSB says it's not defective manufacturing or engineering, we aren't liable."

Maybe we should also have firing squads in court rooms to get rid of lawyers that file frivolous lawsuits like this and getting hurt because you got into an accident because spilled hot coffee on yourself while eating hot soup with one had, doing makeup/shaving with the other, steering with one knee, changing the radio with the other, and using a book to hold the gas pedal down...

I think every court, company, school, and well, anything where a group of adults make decisions, employ an average 5 year old. The job of this child will be to say something whenever he hears something silly.

Also in my world, the only costs incurred by the defendants in a case like this would be however much it costs them to have an intern drive to the court from the nearest office, say to the judge "The NTSB says it's not defective manufacturing or engineering, we aren't liable."

Maybe we should also have firing squads in court rooms to get rid of lawyers that file frivolous lawsuits like this and getting hurt because you got into an accident because spilled hot coffee on yourself while eating hot soup with one had, doing makeup/shaving with the other, steering with one knee, changing the radio with the other, and using a book to hold the gas pedal down...

Amen. Maybe instead of the firing squad, they could give the 5-year-old a gun, and tell the child "shoot anyone who says anything silly."

I think every court, company, school, and well, anything where a group of adults make decisions, employ an average 5 year old. The job of this child will be to say something whenever he hears something silly.

Also in my world, the only costs incurred by the defendants in a case like this would be however much it costs them to have an intern drive to the court from the nearest office, say to the judge "The NTSB says it's not defective manufacturing or engineering, we aren't liable."

Maybe we should also have firing squads in court rooms to get rid of lawyers that file frivolous lawsuits like this and getting hurt because you got into an accident because spilled hot coffee on yourself while eating hot soup with one had, doing makeup/shaving with the other, steering with one knee, changing the radio with the other, and using a book to hold the gas pedal down...

Amen. Maybe instead of the firing squad, they could give the 5-year-old a gun, and tell the child "shoot anyone who says anything silly."

Here is another one Sue everyone just in case :-?

Again the last sentance, can anyone explain this one to me :-? :-?

Matt

I think every court, company, school, and well, anything where a group of adults make decisions, employ an average 5 year old. The job of this child will be to say something whenever he hears something silly.

Also in my world, the only costs incurred by the defendants in a case like this would be however much it costs them to have an intern drive to the court from the nearest office, say to the judge "The NTSB says it's not defective manufacturing or engineering, we aren't liable."

Maybe we should also have firing squads in court rooms to get rid of lawyers that file frivolous lawsuits like this and getting hurt because you got into an accident because spilled hot coffee on yourself while eating hot soup with one had, doing makeup/shaving with the other, steering with one knee, changing the radio with the other, and using a book to hold the gas pedal down...

Amen. Maybe instead of the firing squad, they could give the 5-year-old a gun, and tell the child "shoot anyone who says anything silly."

Here is another one Sue everyone just in case :-?

Again the last sentance, can anyone explain this one to me :-? :-?

Matt

NTSB probable cause determinations are not admissible in evidence! 49 U.S. Code Section 1441(e). Private litigants must prove the cause of the crash to a jury without the benefit of the conclusions of the NTSB Accident Investigations. Many Courts have allowed the factual data in the Field Investigator's "Factual Report" into evidence and some Courts have allowed the jury to read portions of the NTSB "Blue Cover" Report. However, federal courts have begun to follow 49. U.S. Code Section 1441(e) "literally." and have simply refused to allow the NTSB Blue Cover Report into evidence in airline disaster litigation (e.g., Sioux City United Airlines DC-10 Disaster.) There is support for this caution because the Blue Cover Report of the Board often has factual findings intertwined with opinion and analysis such that it would be very difficult for a Judge to extract purely factual information that will have meaning for the jury

Here is another one Sue everyone just in case :-?

Again the last sentance, can anyone explain this one to me :-? :-?

Matt

NTSB probable cause determinations are not admissible in evidence! 49 U.S. Code Section 1441(e). Private litigants must prove the cause of the crash to a jury without the benefit of the conclusions of the NTSB Accident Investigations.

This might seem ridiculous but there could be a very good reason for it. I imagine it's intended to keep the NTSB reports/recommendations completely unbiased & purely in the interests of safety, not for any financial benefit to third parties.

I think every court, company, school, and well, anything where a group of adults make decisions, employ an average 5 year old. The job of this child will be to say something whenever he hears something silly.

Also in my world, the only costs incurred by the defendants in a case like this would be however much it costs them to have an intern drive to the court from the nearest office, say to the judge "The NTSB says it's not defective manufacturing or engineering, we aren't liable."

Maybe we should also have firing squads in court rooms to get rid of lawyers that file frivolous lawsuits like this and getting hurt because you got into an accident because spilled hot coffee on yourself while eating hot soup with one had, doing makeup/shaving with the other, steering with one knee, changing the radio with the other, and using a book to hold the gas pedal down...

Maybe firing squads. But also a nice step would be just making sure that defending a lawsuit and winning costs zero, because lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits, meaning every lawsuit they do not win, pay reasonable costs of the defendant.

Also, why should a business bother defending a lawsuit across ocean? Just invite the lawyers to sue your side of ocean, and post security upfront to pay the defendant