Jury awards $11.35 Million over negligence

Morne

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
699
Display Name

Display name:
Morne
Four years ago a couple flying a Cessna 337 Skymaster crashed in Georgia. They both lived, but were injurned and burned. Jury just handed down this award recently:

www.sys-con.com/node/2103903

Winner Aviation performed repeated troubleshooting on a particular component known as a waste gate, when in fact the problems went much deeper. On the day of the crash, the rear engine on the twin-engine airplane lost power after takeoff, and all attempts to restart it failed.

Plaintiffs also alleged that Winner Aviation was aware that the front engine was long overdue for a complete overhaul, but never recommended an overhaul to Dr. Marsico. Plaintiffs argued at trial that the failure to overhaul this engine or, at the very least, perform a proper inspection and repair of its valve guides and other engine parts, caused a diminution of power during an in-flight emergency—precisely when full power was most important.

Thoughts?
 
The Dr. was unaware the front engine was at TBO? :rofl:

Lawyers can twist anything around and make it your fault. I would imagine POA holds some responsibility for not letting the Dr. know his engine was not running right. :rolleyes:


BTW, the cost of your annuals just went up. Every A&P from now on will recommend over haul of engine every time. ;)
 
Now try to get work done on your plane if it is past TBO.. Nope sorry to much liability.

<---<^>--->
 
It looks to me that the negligence was more on the plane owner side than on the shop side. After all responsibility of the due times goes with the owner. A plane can be serviced by multiple shops but the owner is responsible for all the logs. Just the fact that the front engine was due for overhaul would legally bound the owner for any engine malfunction.

Two decades ago I was involved on a Piper Navajo lawsuit were the plaintif claim that plane was poorly designed because the airframe was totally destroyed after hitting the side of a mountain at 200kts. The pilot was drunk at the incident, but no case against him but against Piper and Bendix (me) because it let the plane descend too early. The plaintiff lost the case when at the last minute it was proven that an alcoholic pilot may had a misdjugement on flying the plane.

José
 
I love the altruistic quote from the blood-sucking lawyer:
"The outcome of this case demonstrates that a citizen's constitutional right to a trial by a jury of her peers is alive and well. By reaching this verdict, the jury sends an important message to the airplane repair community—safety of flight for pilots and their passengers is of utmost importance and there can be no shortcomings whatsoever..."

The lawyers are richer by millions and the rest of us will pick up that tab.
 
IThe lawyers are richer by millions and the rest of us will pick up that tab.


Remember no greedy Plaintiff, no lawyer, now law suit. Let's put blame where blame is due.
 
I love the altruistic quote from the blood-sucking lawyer:
"The outcome of this case demonstrates that a citizen's constitutional right to a trial by a jury of her peers is alive and well. By reaching this verdict, the jury sends an important message to the airplane repair community—safety of flight for pilots and their passengers is of utmost importance and there can be no shortcomings whatsoever..."

The lawyers are richer by millions and the rest of us will pick up that tab.
We were discussing this dude in the other thread on the subject yesterday.

Keep in mind, this is apparently the same lawyer who made millions off the lawsuit against Boeing for the 737 rudder reversal issue (USAIR 427)....he then bought himself a rare F9F Panther (not many airworthy ones left) and then he crashed it. When he didn't like what the NTSB report said, he actually SUED the NTSB!

He lost that one......
 
Remember no greedy Plaintiff, no lawyer, now law suit. Let's put blame where blame is due.
It is unfortunately a bit of both. There are plenty of ambulance chasers who put ideas in peoples heads.
 
It is unfortunately a bit of both. There are plenty of ambulance chasers who put ideas in peoples heads.


No question there are some attorneys who promote this type of law suit with the promise of a payoff, but ultimately it is the responsibility of the Plaintiff to decide to file the law suit. Again, no Plaintiff, no law suit, and the lawyer goes on to the next case.
 
No question there are some attorneys who promote this type of law suit with the promise of a payoff, but ultimately it is the responsibility of the Plaintiff to decide to file the law suit. Again, no Plaintiff, no law suit, and the lawyer goes on to the next case.

That may be true, but it is human nature to blame someone ELSE when something bad happens to YOU, especially when the temptation of deep pockets is present.

I suspect that perhaps the attorneys in this particular case were not "ambulance chasing," but rather were specifically sought because of their track records in recovering significant financial rewards from the aforementioned deep pockets.


JKG
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering if Wolk would have taken this case if the aircraft was maintained by a A&P-IA who has a house mortgage, a car payment, and an ex who gets every thing he has. ?

No big pay off = no wolk.
 
I'm wondering if Wolk would have taken this case if the aircraft was maintained by a A&P-IA who has a house mortgage, a car payment, and an ex who gets every thing he has. ?

You forgot: No insurance.
 
You forgot: No insurance.

Even if an individual has liability insurance, it usually isn't for much unless the individual has a substantial net worth, in which case he probably wouldn't be practicing as an A&P in a small-time operation. Winner Aviation isn't some rinky-dink FBO, they're a fairly large operation with some deep pockets.

Unfortunately, these types of lawsuits (justified or not) result in increasing costs and possibly limiting choice for everyone.

The real problem with these cases are the judges and juries which make these types of decisions and grant these types of awards. I know that courts have to rule according to the law and the evidence presented, but let's face it, there are quite a few questionable judgments which come from those same courts.


JKG
 
Last edited:
So I guess none of the blame for this award can be placed on the jurors, who decided who was at fault and how much to award the Plaintiff? Far easier to blame it on "greedy" lawyers rather than "stupid" jurors.
 
If I was Emperor of the world I'd put dis guy and Zoom on the same court case.
 
So I guess none of the blame for this award can be placed on the jurors, who decided who was at fault and how much to award the Plaintiff? Far easier to blame it on "greedy" lawyers rather than "stupid" jurors.
They can only make that determination based on the evidence that the judge allows them to see. And, just for good measure, that fancy NTSB report that they spend a year and a lot of taxpayer money creating? That is NOT something that the jury gets to see. So, in the duration of a trial a bunch of lay people are expected to come to the same sort of reasoned conclusion that we would hope the NTSB experts have reached in a year?
 
I agree these law suits and their over the top awards are not good for aviation.

I have to ask the question. Are these type of awards seen with regards to other vehicular accidents? Cars, trucks, boats, etc? Or is aviation unfailry blamed? Anybody know?
 
I have to ask the question. Are these type of awards seen with regards to other vehicular accidents? Cars, trucks, boats, etc? Or is aviation unfailry blamed? Anybody know?

It doesn't matter, as long as the defendant has insurance, or some other form of deep pockets.

Another recent case that came up was a guy in Louisiana who's gas was shut off for non-payment. He disconnected his stove (leaving the gas pipe open), realized he didn't have hot water, so went outside and turned the gas back on. Six hours later, the gas ignited, burning the entire family.

The gas company lost to the tune of $15,000,000, because they didn't do enough to prevent the customer from illegally turning the gas back on.
 
I agree these law suits and their over the top awards are not good for aviation.

I have to ask the question. Are these type of awards seen with regards to other vehicular accidents? Cars, trucks, boats, etc? Or is aviation unfailry blamed? Anybody know?

I'm in the car business, our industry has some of the same type suits, but most of the litigation is "lemon law" type, pretty easy to convince a jury that the customer's unhappiness about the monthly payment is really all about the funny noise that only they can hear. :mad2: I think one of the big differences is, the car manufacturers will defend the baseless suits to the bitter end and will out lawyer most plaintiffs on a big case. Very few attorneys want to take a contingency case that they aren't pretty sure of winning and even fewer want a risky case that will take years to litigate. ;) The payoff isn't worth the risk and a smart lawyer won't waste his/her time, and almost 100% of jurors understand how a car operates and in an aviation case, I would bet 0% of the jurors has ever taken a flight lesson. :rolleyes:
 
, and almost 100% of jurors understand how a car operates and in an aviation case, I would bet 0% of the jurors has ever taken a flight lesson. :rolleyes:


That would beg the question if the jury is a jury of our peers if they do not understand aircraft, nor aviation. Maybe if the jury selection pool were mandated to be pilots we'd get better, more reasonable outcomes.

Notice our lawyer colleagues are staying away from this one. :D
 
Jury selection is a fine art it seems. I noticed during jury selection a number of times in the passed thirty years, that anyone with the slightest knowledge {of the topic litigated} was immediately dismissed. Educational or professional background listed in the jury questionnaire might also disqualify you for that reason. I never made it on to a jury...
 
Jury selection is a fine art it seems. I noticed during jury selection a number of times in the passed thirty years, that anyone with the slightest knowledge {of the topic litigated} was immediately dismissed. Educational or professional background listed in the jury questionnaire might also disqualify you for that reason. I never made it on to a jury...

That's very true. I noticed the above during several jury selection I was involved. Also if you have any type of bias against the defendant background they will not choose you.

José
 
I made it all the way to the final selection round on a Capital Punishment case and was released by the Judge due to a "hardship".

The Judge asked if I had any reason I didn't want to or couldn't serve and I replied honestly that my wife was looking forward to a long-planned vacation, and that I had pre-paid airline tickets to Hawaii.

He didn't have to dismiss me for that but he was kind. He explained that a vacation normally isn't a hardship and I replied that I understood that and was willing to serve. A few more questions and "Yes, Your Honor"'s later, I was dismissed.

The selection process was incredibly detailed and long due to it being a possible Capital Punishment case. A huge paper quiz on all sorts of questions dealing with views on Capital Punishment, religion, etc... and tons of questions about what I had seen in the media in the highly publicized case already, how much local media I typically watched or listened to, specifics of the broadcast stations, and various other things.

We were down to being scheduled in Court by twos for individual Jury selection interviews, which is when the dismissal took place. I'd been to Court numerous times and had consulted with my company's HR department about things I'd received in a letter from the Court after making it to what I assume was the final Jury selection round.

It basically said to get prepared to be in a Jury box for a long time and here's what to expect if you're chosen, etc.

It's awkward sitting in a Courtroom answering honestly that you'd like to go on vacation, when a man who's sitting at the Defendant's table only a few feet away, has his life on the line. I was mentally prepared for the Judge to say I needed to cancel that vacation and do my part. And would have.

The most difficult thing was my company's pay policies at the time vs the time estimated for the trial. They simply said they allowed employees to use up all of their PTO and take some from the next year, but they didn't pay the difference between the Jury Dury pay and my salary after that.

I had brought along documentation of this because they'd asked us to bring any hardships, including fiscal, along to the selection process that day, but it never got to those questions. The vacation was the dismissal point the Judge allowed and only because of the pre-paid airline tickets.

I had a folder full of documentation on my salary, a letter from HR with their Jury policy, and a printout of my spreadsheet showing the fiscal loss, but it never came out of the folder.

Since the trial was scheduled to be something just under three months long, and there was a warning that the Jury could be sequestered, etc... I calculated that I would lose somewhere between $10-$15K for doing my Civic duty, maybe higher... and was willing to do so, but ouch!

I don't know how anyone with a serious professional job can AFFORD to sit on a long term Jury trial like that one. (Well other than the lawyers, that is.)

Anyway, we got to have our vacation (and appreciated the Judge an awful lot for that) and watched the trial in the media.

The Defendant was convicted and sentenced to death for killing witnesses to another man's crime.

His name, Robert Ray. See this web page for links to the various trial news and info on the memorial set up for the victims.

http://www.fieldswolfememorialfund.org/press.html

Somewhat eerie to have been that close to being on that Jury, watching it all play out later on the TV news.
 
Very well put Nate.....

As a self employed person I / we are in unique position because there is no HR dept. If I get called and am chosen to sit on a lengthly trial the financial implications are real scary...... It goes like this..

Judge sits there for weeks making 700 bucks a day
Court staff are there making 350-500 a day
Lawyers sit there making 1200+ a day
Media people cover it making 400-600 a day.

The jury that has the fate of the defendent is paid 25 bucks a day.:nonod::nonod:.

A case lasting a few days, I can cover..... A Casey Anthony deal would sink 99% of the self employed people.... Jus sayin..

Ben.
 
On the high-profile criminal cases it is rather easy to get dropped early on. You state that you followed the press coverage with great interest and that you already formed an opinion on the facts of the case.

Where you are really stuck is if it is a civil case or some obscure white-collar crime that didn't even make it into the press or a case transferred from another jurisdiction.
 
I made it all the way to the final selection round on a Capital Punishment case and was released by the Judge due to a "hardship".

Twice selected for jury duty both times rejected, both times when asked if I had any preconceived Ideas about the case, I said "Yes"
 
I have been called twice... I have been picked twice.... Both criminal...

First was a case of assault on a sheriff officers 5 year old son at a day care center by one of the staff... As the case unfolded it was crystal clear the accused was being railroaded... The bad press got that daycare center closed. Facts came out the sheriffs wife was opening up her own daycare center and within a day of the "offending" day care closed she opened hers,, managed by the same person who made the false claims against defendent.. Stunk to high heaven.... The guy was found innocent in the first 5 minutes of deliberation by us 12 jurors....

Second one was a rape of a 30 year old girl that was from an old time family here.. The prosecution contented she was pure as the driven snow and has been totally devastated by this "rape".. It was a she said / he said all the way through. I could not reach the "beyond reasonable doubt"and neither could the other 11 jurors... Next day in the paper the "whole" story was published.....Girl was a serious crackhead, on probation, and had a criminal history a few pages long... During the trial it came out she waited 9 days before she reported the rape and was taken to the hospital for a rape test... She cryed on the stand and claimed she was so shook up she could not get her thoughts together to call the police for a week and a half..... Turned out she waited so the drugs were clear of her system so she didn't fail the drug test and since she was on probation for a previous drug conviction that would have sent her back to jail for a long time......... That poor defendent was aiming to get 20 to life for her lies....

Since jurors are picked by the courts and that basically is the same office as the prosecuter, and since they hate to lose a case... for some strange reason I have not been called to do my civic duty since... Coincidence.. I think not...:no::no::no: YMMV.

Ben.
 
Last edited:
It is unfortunately a bit of both. There are plenty of ambulance chasers who put ideas in peoples heads.


I contacted a legal group last year after a motorcycle vs car wreck. I listened to the guy and answered questions, no problem. However, I hung up the phone on the guy when he told me "Remember. We don't sue people. We sue insurance companies."
It's scary that people think that way.
 
On the high-profile criminal cases it is rather easy to get dropped early on. You state that you followed the press coverage with great interest and that you already formed an opinion on the facts of the case.

Where you are really stuck is if it is a civil case or some obscure white-collar crime that didn't even make it into the press or a case transferred from another jurisdiction.

Twice selected for jury duty both times rejected, both times when asked if I had any preconceived Ideas about the case, I said "Yes"

Not saying you guys are doing this, but I find the "techniques to get off a Jury" that folks run up to you with -- and try to get you to do -- when you say you have Jury Duty, a bit repugnant.

I would prefer not to lie and perjure myself, just to get off a Jury.

People do it all the time, though... judging by all the "help" I got from co-workers and friends back then.

(I didn't discuss the case, only that I had Jury Duty and that I might be out of the office for a very long time if it fell outside of the vacation and that I wasn't sure if the vacation would be cancelled. I had people lining up at my desk explaining "ways to get off the jury". Sickening.)

Yeah, I could show up with a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook, a Bible, and wear a necklace of swastikas and crosses to Court, just to get tossed... anyone can.

It tends to ruin the overall system, though -- when the only people on juries are the folks with nothing better to do.
 
I agree these law suits and their over the top awards are not good for aviation.

I have to ask the question. Are these type of awards seen with regards to other vehicular accidents? Cars, trucks, boats, etc? Or is aviation unfailry blamed? Anybody know?

I know that in suits against the railroads when someone drives in front of a train, the answer is most definitely YES. It's like getting hit by the gravy train. Sometimes the stuff that judges allow the jury to see/not see is unbelievable.
 
I could see it being the responsibility of the maintenance company IF they kept all the logs in their office. That would put the responsibility on them to keep the owner informed. On the other hand, surely the owner has the majority of the responsibility to NOT continue to fly, on extended trips, an aircraft he doesn't believe is airworthy. Presuming the PILOT, the PROFESSIONAL PILOT, was aware of these issues, it would seem to me she is the negligent one in all of this.
The jury screwed up on this one.
"Oh that? The shop says they fixed it."
 
Not saying you guys are doing this, but I find the "techniques to get off a Jury" that folks run up to you with -- and try to get you to do -- when you say you have Jury Duty, a bit repugnant....SNIP....
I wouldn't mind being on a jury. In fact, many years ago I did all I could to get impaneled including a shave and a haircut and a three piece suit. I'd skip the shave today, but I am more than ready to serve.
You don't have a right to complain about the system unless you are willing to work in it.
I still think the jury buggered this one up.
 
I'm wondering if Wolk would have taken this case if the aircraft was maintained by a A&P-IA who has a house mortgage, a car payment, and an ex who gets every thing he has. ?

No big pay off = no wolk.

Oh great You had to use his name! Now he is going to come in here and tell us how to use this board! Who ever is running this thing better get ready to be sued!:hairraise:
 
I would prefer not to lie and perjure myself, just to get off a Jury.

I wouldn't have to do either. I follow pretty well what goes on in our county in terms of crime, if you do that, it is difficult not to have formed an opinion on what happened and who is responsible. Perjuring myself would be to state that I DONT have an opinion on the case, as everyone knows around here I have an opinion on everything :wink2: .

If they pay my daily rate, maybe my opinions would be a bit less formed :dunno:.
 
Not saying you guys are doing this, but I find the "techniques to get off a Jury" that folks run up to you with -- and try to get you to do -- when you say you have Jury Duty, a bit repugnant.

I would prefer not to lie and perjure myself, just to get off a Jury.

People do it all the time, though... judging by all the "help" I got from co-workers and friends back then.

(I didn't discuss the case, only that I had Jury Duty and that I might be out of the office for a very long time if it fell outside of the vacation and that I wasn't sure if the vacation would be cancelled. I had people lining up at my desk explaining "ways to get off the jury". Sickening.)

Yeah, I could show up with a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook, a Bible, and wear a necklace of swastikas and crosses to Court, just to get tossed... anyone can.

It tends to ruin the overall system, though -- when the only people on juries are the folks with nothing better to do.

In a County this size and remote as we are it is pretty hard to not have opinions of what's going on..
we read this each morning.

http://www.whidbeynewstimes.com/
 
Man,,, Do I have issues with that.
Keeping the logs or being responsible? If the logs are locked away in the maintenance office, then they need to keep the owner up to date. That would be as simple as putting the issues on the repair order. Engine #1 2,100 hours TBO +100, Engine #2 1,900 hours TBO -100. I get that with my car's mechanic. It still doesn't make sense that the jury could award the OWNER when it appears it was his problem all along. And TBO means... well, nothing. It is a relative number the manufacturer gives you to suggest when it should be done.
How many people follow their manufacturer's recommendations on anything they own?
In aviation, and principally because of lawsuits and insurance companies, it is nearly a hard stop.
 
Keeping the logs or being responsible?

My Issues start with, why would any owner allow anyone else to hold property which the owner is responsible for maintaining?

Does the FBO or maintenance facility have an agreement which makes them the operator? that is the only reason I can think of that would relieve the owner from the responsibility of maintaining the maintenance records.

you can't do that with them locked up at the facility holding them.
 
Back
Top