Lidle Widow Sued by Apartment Dwellers

flyingcheesehead said:
Hmm... And he just sued someone else for 5 mil too. I don't have much sympathy for the guy.
Click to expand...

Ahh, so the guy sues someone for reasons unspecified and that makes him a bad guy. So, if you suffer large losses due to somone elses negligence, or corruption, you wouldn't sue for recovery? If the guy lives in that apartment, he is playing in the financial big leagues. 5 million dollar law suits are a matter of course in business at that level. Take my buddy Chooch for example, he invented the Solid State Gyro that was used on the Patriot missile. He licensed it's use and the company he licensed it to wasn't paying the royalties. Chooch had to sue them for it. Does that make Chooch the bad guy? I'm really surprized at the uneducated/uninformed conclusions being jumped to in this thread....
 
Someone crashes their car into my house. Why should I have to pay a dime to fix it? I didn't do anything to deserve that. Same basic idea - I think the $$$ and location are clouding judgements.

Now claiming Cirrus is a defective product? That's crap. Just like the woman suing Cessna because her hubby died on takeoff flying a 182 out of Greenwood Lake. A/C hadn't flown in 6mos. NTSB finds fuel in tank, ice in carb. Hello - tank sumping, anyone? Still, Cessna has to respond, get lawyers and investigators up there, waste management time and effort, insurance co incurs costs to investigate. Same with Cirrus. Each time it happens it costs a lot of money just to respond to the allegations, let alone fight them. Who ends up paying? WE DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
flyersfan31 said:
Someone crashes their car into my house. Why should I have to pay a dime to fix it? I didn't do anything to deserve that. Same basic idea - I think the $$$ and location are clouding judgements.

Now claiming Cirrus is a defective product? That's crap. Just like the woman suing Cessna because her hubby died on takeoff flying a 182 out of Greenwood Lake. A/C hadn't flown in 6mos. NTSB finds fuel in tank, ice in carb. Hello - tank sumping, anyone? Still, Cessna has to respond, get lawyers and investigators up there, waste management time and effort, insurance co incurs costs to investigate. Same with Cirrus. Each time it happens it costs a lot of money just to respond to the allegations, let alone fight them. Who ends up paying? WE DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...


Heck, the guy is a lay person when it comes to flying and aircraft. He could have gotten the impetus to sue Cirrus for having a defective product RIGHT HERE ON THIS BOARD!!!!! We won't even start on the Red Board commentaries of the defective Cirrus (which I have never supported). PILOTS WERE BLAMING THE PLANE!!! Why should we be surprized when this guy picks up on that??? What kind of standards are we engaging here? There is so much Cirrus bashing that happens on these boards, how can we be surprized or even annoyed much less disdainfull when someone that has suffered a loss involving such craft employes that angle in the suit for his loss. Can't have it both ways people. They can use comments made on these boards to support their case even, "Look jury, this is what PILOTS think of these planes!" Here is a perfect example of where uneducated internet opinion espousing brings about a negative effect and cost us money. So, who's to blame for the insurance cost increase???? We gotta own our share....
 
Henning said:
Ahh, so the guy sues someone for reasons unspecified and that makes him a bad guy.
Click to expand...

No, someone said they didn't like him on a web site, and he went after them for $5 mil. THAT makes him a bad guy, IMHO.

Your friend, on the other hand, was perfectly justified. Not all lawsuits are frivolous.
 
The Forbes article did fill in a few blanks, if read carefully.

The 'apartment' was made of 3 smaller apartments, turned into a large apartment, "worth several million dollars". It is likely he is the owner, or he wouldn't be making such a big stink. He is claiming the damage to property, personal items, and furniture.

Does he have the right to sue? Certainly, to reclaim the damages incurred, maybe even some extra for the inconcenience. But $7M? That seems way over the top! (Is he looking to buy the entire floor, perhaps?)

The Lidle estate may not be as well off as many might think! The huge $$$ contracts that we hear about are not paid up front. It will depend on how far along he was in his contract, whether any performance bonuses had kicked in, and how frugal he was in his money management. Many highly paid professional athletes hardly have two nickels to rub together, because of poor management.
But I would venture that either he himself, or the Yankee's, had a very large life insurance policy in place. It would only make sense.

His previous lawsuit really has nothing to do with this case, except confirming he has lawyers, and isn't afraid to use them. Perhaps the woman who made the claims about his work was right, or maybe he did suffer some reduction of income due to her printed statements. Another court will decide that. If the woman's mouth was "ruined", then why did she print it instead of suing the dentist? hmmm... Makes you wonder...

The extended suit against Cirrus is a crock, but it is SOP within the legal sytem. Defer the blame, try to make the deepest pockets responsiible. And yes, we do pay for those lawyers who must now defend Cirrus... Even if you do not own a Cirrus, you are paying. Because every suit brought against a manufacturer ups the overall premium across the industry.

Please do not think that I am against the idea of recovering what is legitimate. Or even suing a manufacturer when it is truly at fault! But in this case, there are still a few facts which have yet to be determined by the NTSB. When they make their findings public, then everything will move forward...

Now, back to Anna..... LOL
 
flyersfan31 said:
Someone crashes their car into my house. Why should I have to pay a dime to fix it? I didn't do anything to deserve that. Same basic idea - I think the $$$ and location are clouding judgements.

Now claiming Cirrus is a defective product? That's crap. Just like the woman suing Cessna because her hubby died on takeoff flying a 182 out of Greenwood Lake. A/C hadn't flown in 6mos. NTSB finds fuel in tank, ice in carb. Hello - tank sumping, anyone? Still, Cessna has to respond, get lawyers and investigators up there, waste management time and effort, insurance co incurs costs to investigate. Same with Cirrus. Each time it happens it costs a lot of money just to respond to the allegations, let alone fight them. Who ends up paying? WE DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I won't even get into why Cessnas are defectivly designed due to where the wing is placed:rolleyes:
 
So, let me see, the widow sues Cirrus, the dentist sues the widow, the lady with the bad teeth sues the dentist, the dentist sues the lady with the bad teeth:
http://lyingdentist.com/
http://baddentist.com/

Once all the money has changed hands, I think it boils down to us (via aviation insurance premiums) paying the lady with the bad teeth, and everybody's lawyers, allowing them to buy new Cirruses!
-harry
 
Henning said:
That's probably about 150sqft and I doubt that's riverfront with a view....
Click to expand...
Well, no and yes. My wife owns a 850 sq. ft. one bedroom condo in a 5 year old building in the Upper East Side of Manhattan. $750,000 is a bit high for that apartment, but we'll take it! :yes:

You are right, no view.... an excellent view is worth about $200/sq. ft.

-Skip
 
Last edited:
mantakos said:
So, let me see, the widow sues Cirrus, the dentist sues the widow, the lady with the bad teeth sues the dentist, the dentist sues the lady with the bad teeth:
http://lyingdentist.com/
http://baddentist.com/

Once all the money has changed hands, I think it boils down to us (via aviation insurance premiums) paying the lady with the bad teeth, and everybody's lawyers, allowing them to buy new Cirruses!
-harry
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. The lawyers, who are entirely univolved in any of the original events, will end up with 70% of the money. No wonder lawyers love to call this "the greatest legal system in the world".
 
mantakos said:
So, let me see, the widow sues Cirrus, the dentist sues the widow, the lady with the bad teeth sues the dentist, the dentist sues the lady with the bad teeth:
http://lyingdentist.com/
http://baddentist.com/

Once all the money has changed hands, I think it boils down to us (via aviation insurance premiums) paying the lady with the bad teeth, and everybody's lawyers, allowing them to buy new Cirruses!
-harry
Click to expand...

Wow, what an unhappy existence. Rosenthal's whole life must be one drama after another. What a sad way to live.
 
And Here's a new tidbit about the suit from:
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=d1d75cb1-8c59-48f9-8156-2ae11e61392a&

Not to be left out of the Lidle case, even if he lives 13 floors above the crash site, Dr. Lawrence Rosenthal, a dentist to the rich and famous, filed a $7 million complaint against Lidle's estate, claiming his home was destroyed when Lidle's small plane crashed into the apartment building in Manhattan.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of damage for being 13 floors above.
 
mantakos said:
So, let me see, the widow sues Cirrus, the dentist sues the widow, the lady with the bad teeth sues the dentist, the dentist sues the lady with the bad teeth:
http://lyingdentist.com/
http://baddentist.com/

Once all the money has changed hands, I think it boils down to us (via aviation insurance premiums) paying the lady with the bad teeth, and everybody's lawyers, allowing them to buy new Cirruses!
Click to expand...

LOL Harry... I think you've pretty much got it!

I don't know whether to laugh or be mad about that...
 
Missa said:
That's a lot of damage for being 13 floors above.
Click to expand...

I was just going to post that. There was still potential for it to be half-legitimate if he was the apartment that was crashed into, but...

THIRTEEN FLOORS AWAY??? Give me a freakin' break. I guess the rest of the building is probably going to file suit now as well. :mad:
 
THIRTEEN FLOORS AWAY???
Click to expand...
If you read through a few different articles, you get some confusing, conflicting details.

The building seems to have 50 floors, though some sources listed it as having 40. The NTSB said the engine "landed" on the 30th floor, but some sources said the plane impacted the 40th floor.

If you look at pictures from the incident, it doesn't look like the building even has 13 floors above the floors where the flames were, but maybe 11 or 12.

I dunno...
-harry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top