vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
The EAA attorney says none of the things he alledgedly said
What did I attribute to the EAA attorney that he didn't say?
Liabilities of the A/HB builders
- Thread starter Tom-D
- Start date
What did I attribute to the EAA attorney that he didn't say?
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
Well, what about it? Later in the webinar he discusses how to mitigate the risk.
My opinion ,FWIW, is that if you follow his advice, the risk to a home builder from even a third party is greatly reduced.
That leaves the owner/operator with the greatest exposure, and in the case of an AB-EXP, where it should be.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Yep last I knew the pilot was responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft.
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nice to see you boys finally reading, and studying the legal opinions and materials put out by the liability experts at EAA. Maybe you guys should attend the liability risk mitigation seminars put on by EAA at OSH.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
And FAA inspectors hire out as expert witnesses all the time. I've been involved in one.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
The FAA does not like to act as legal guidance in any civil case, but you subpoena a FAA employee they will show up.
as well as your A&P, brother in law, partner, and anyone else who ever saw you do something stupid.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
Because I believe, just me now, that the "manufacturers" the law makers have in mind are people engaged in commerce and not hobbyist. Think about the klutziest, non mechanical person you know, who when given a tool box and a honey do list could destroy a house in an afternoon. That is who could have built one of these things.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
The attorney was addressing a nation wide membership, so I would think that if he thought the products liability law applied in some states and not others he would have said so.
It would help if you would make your points clearer. "It may not be true..." , "I don't believe that is true...". Are you certain on any of this? The EAA attorney didn't waffle, he said what he said.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
Yes, judges interpret regulations. In enforcement actions against pilots, guess how the judge arrives at his/her interpretation of a regulation.
Gave expert opinions in a civil matter between two parties in an official capacity as an FAA inspecter? That surprises me. Every time I have seen government witnesses testify, they have had a government attorney there to object to providing opinion testimony. Fact testimony, sure. But not expert testimony.
I don't know how I could be any clearer. Products liability law is a matter of state law, that will vary from state to state. Any claim that the law is the same in all states is stupidly wrong.
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
The attorney touched upon three main topics of the law:
1. Contracts- Laws vary by state , have a local attorney review the purchase agreement and waivers.
2. Torts- How to reduce your risk.
3. Product Liability- Home builder is not a "manufacturer". Unlike contracts, he didn't say it depended upon the state.
The attorney impressed me as knowledgable , intelligent, and sincere. He was addressing a subject that is of great concern to the membership so I would think he would choose his words carefully.
Any chance he may know this subject better than you?
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
Tom, for your info, he did discuss unfinished projects and deceased builders.
Zero chance if he is talking about the law in my state. I really don't understand where you are coming from here. Nothing you have said is at all contradictory to what I have posted, unless you are really claiming that products liability law is the same in all states. If so, then I don't really know what to tell you.
Last edited:
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
So, in your state an amateur home builder who built an EXP aircraft in accordance with the letter and spirit of the regulation , would be considered by the law as a "manufacturer"? IOW, if a plane crashed in your state, it wouldn't matter if it was an AB-EXP or a new Cessna as far as product liability goes?
vintage cessna
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,076
- Display Name
Display name:
retro
If no state would consider a home builder a "manufacturer" does that mean there is no variance in product liability law amongst the states? Or could it mean that while all not the same there is some commonality?
Last edited:
I don't quite get what your asking, or why this is so difficult. Products liability law is simply not the same in every state. Yes, there are general concepts that you see from state to state. So, I guess, there is some "commonality", if that is what you mean. But given identical fact patterns, the results may be radically different under different state's laws.
My state's product liability act is fairly unique in some respects (and the act itself is poorly written), and not unique in others. My state permits juries to compare the fault of the plaintiff with the strict liability of a manufacturer and apportion fault accordingly-- whatever that means. Law professors would groan at this because the concepts of strict liability and compartive fault are completely contradictory concepts. Strict liability originally meant that it didn't matter whether there was fault on the part of the plaintiff or anyone else; the defendant had to pay up. This is just one example of how products liability law may differ from state to state.
To your point though, I am quite sure that in many states, there are restrictions of product liability law to "professional" manufacturers-- those in the business of manufacturing a particular product at issue. But that isn't inevitably so.
The federal FAA regulation is irrelevant to state product liability law definitions. I quoted the exact definition of a manufacturer above that matters in my state. I don't think it matters in my state whether it is AB-EXP for product liability application of strict liability, or mere negligence against the manufacturer. There is a difference for liability for sellers-- in other words, a private sale by a non-manufacturer is not going to give rise to products liability liability. So, if I sell my used car to you, a car that was manufactured by GM or Chrysler, there is not going to be a liability claim againt me for manufacturing or design defects. But the act states that a "manufacturer" is strictly liable for manufacturing defects.
My point really isn't that this an area frought with peril. My point is simply that you cannot assume away all liability and any blanket statements of non-liability are simply false. I don't even think that is your point. As I said above, I don't really know why people are arguing so much in this thread.
Last edited:
Where the variance is is if being a "manufacturer" is required for product liability to apply.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
$100,000.
