And if the state doesn't require liability, many public airports will if you rent hangar or tiedown space.
Appeals Court: Cirrus not responsible for plane crash that killed two
- Thread starter Jim Logajan
- Start date
And if the state doesn't require liability, many public airports will if you rent hangar or tiedown space.
JeffDG
Touchdown! Greaser!
I believe that most Brits would disagree that the language I speak is called "English".
And, don't get me started on people getting England, Britain and the UK all jumbled up! Some seem to think the terms are all interchangeable...they're not, they're all distinct concepts.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,074
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
The USA and England. Two countries separated by a common language.
olasek
Pattern Altitude
The lawyers for the families plan to appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court so who knows if we heard the last of it.
As I said. There are a couple of lawyers behind this who stand to walk home with 5mil vs. being out 7 years of litigation cost. They won't let this go until the last appeal is exhausted, almost like a death-penalty case.
JeffDG
Touchdown! Greaser!
Bah, it's all "over there" and they have bad teeth!
I advise you to visit Glasgow and walk up to some locals and tell them how much you love it there in England...
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,074
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
I believe that most Brits would disagree that the language I speak is called "English".
Having just received my replacement plastic certificate, I see that the FAA has me listed as "English Proficient."
Let the Brits arque with the FAA.
olasek
Pattern Altitude
And now the case is in the hands of the Minnesota Supreme Court for a review. There was only about 14% chance that the Supreme Court would take it but apparently it did. I wonder what the outcome will be - this time it will be final for sure.
The MN supreme court is an intensely political body with high turnover of judges and short terms. Hard to keep track which way they are leaning in any particular week.
ebacon
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 502
- Location
- Rochester Hills, MI
- Display Name
Display name:
Bounces Three Times
The Supreme Court doesn't re-hear the entire case. They only answer a few, sometimes only one, certified questions.
Anyone know what the certified questions are on appeal? I quickly clicked around the MN Supreme Court website and didn't see anything.
Anyone know what the certified questions are on appeal? I quickly clicked around the MN Supreme Court website and didn't see anything.
Probably the key question the appeals court shot the case down with: Is a training course bundled into the price of a brick and mortar product a 'product' or 'education'.
If it is 'education', the teacher is immune from claims that arise from the student being a dummy.
olasek
Pattern Altitude
Agreed, but they still may review the entire case.
I am no legal expert but what I know is that 'certified question' relates to one court asking another court for a review of certain 'questions'. I don't think in this case appellate court is asking the supreme court for answers to certified questions - I think we have a fairly standard review of the case initiated by the parties to this lawsuit.
Last edited:
JeffDG
Touchdown! Greaser!
Can someone with Westlaw grab a copy of the order granting cert and find out which questions the court has accepted for review?
ebacon
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 502
- Location
- Rochester Hills, MI
- Display Name
Display name:
Bounces Three Times
That'll be enough, then.
Weilke,
You nailed it on the questions. They are the same ones that were presented to the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court granted appeal for "further review of the decision of the court of appeals"
The questions in the lower court were:
I. Does an airplane manufacturer‟s duty to warn by providing adequate instructions for the safe use of its aircraft include a duty to provide pilot training? II. Are negligence claims against an aviation-training provider barred under the educational-malpractice doctrine where the essence of the claims is that the provider failed to provide an effective education?
ebacon
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 502
- Location
- Rochester Hills, MI
- Display Name
Display name:
Bounces Three Times
JeffDG
Touchdown! Greaser!
Actually, no. They only review the case on the grounds presented and accepted by the court.
They cannot add additional grounds to the filing, and they cannot review issues that were not presented below. So if a lawyer comes up with a novel new theory, he's SOL, because it would have had to be raised at trial and at the Court of Appeals in order for the Supreme Court to even look at it.
Doesn't say much about what they certified.
ebacon
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 502
- Location
- Rochester Hills, MI
- Display Name
Display name:
Bounces Three Times
They didn't use many words. They wrote:
"further review of the decision of the court of appeals"
With the Pinto there was an analysis memo from Ford that paying the nnn death claims would be cheaper than modifying the gas tanks on nn,nnn Pintos. If that ended up not being true...
olasek
Pattern Altitude
Good news for the common sense, Minnesota Supreme Court in the 4-2 ruling yesterday agreed with the Appeals Court:
“The duty to warn has never before required a supplier or manufacturer to provide training, only accurate and thorough instructions on the safe use of the product, as Cirrus has done here,” wrote Justice G. Barry Anderson.
“The duty to warn has never before required a supplier or manufacturer to provide training, only accurate and thorough instructions on the safe use of the product, as Cirrus has done here,” wrote Justice G. Barry Anderson.
Last edited:
edmeis3
Filing Flight Plan
Aren't the plantiffs expected to pay fixed costs like travel, expert witnesses, etc. out of pocket or via collateral pledges? Lot of expense in addition to contingency fees in a case like this I'd imagine.
olasek
Pattern Altitude
Never heard of such a thing in the American legal system but in the British, yeah, the losing side may end up paying some (all) expenses of the other side.