United and American sued over WTC crashes

masloki said:
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/11/usa-sept11-airlines-idINL1E8KB2SM20120911

The case at factual level:
* WTC developer says United, American airlines negligent
* Court to decide if developer was already compensated
* Judge says a jury may need to resolve the dispute

But, at the logical level, suing the airlines for this seems like a stretch. If they could sue the atmosphere for the air that supported the planes, they probably would.
Click to expand...

I believe the 9/11 report says terrorists used faxes to declare war on the western culture. I forget the details, but in my mind that validated our declaration of war on terrorism, as nebulous as that was. In any case, I think declaration of war on us in some way invalidates any such lawsuits.
 
It is interesting to me that the judge did not set a hearing date... What he has here is a really slippery can of worms with the potential to create a legal crises of unprecedented magnitude - and I suspect he is hoping for rescue from a higher court or from the Congress before he has to rule...
Follow me through, here...
Ignoring the enticing issue of double dipping (which is the whole point of the Silversomething suit - to get more money without having to work for it) what is the core issue facing the judge?

Well, if the suit does go to trial and Silversomething does get permission to raid the airline's insurance company based on the premise that the airline has a duty to foresee and prevent all criminal acts that result in injury or loss to others then the entire insurance industry collapses...
Why?, you ask quizzically...
If that becomes the legal standard, then every time a pizza parlor is stuck up and the robbers rush across the street with their $102 in loot causing a soccer mom to crash her SUV into a taxicab to avoid hitting them, then the pizza parlor/insurer is liable for the damaged vehicles, whiplash, and loss of consortium for the crashors and crashees, as well as the PTSD of every person on the street who witnessed said horrific scene...
i.e. the pizza parlor (and it's insurer) are liable because they failed to prevent the crime from taking place in the first place..

Being that society has not found a way to prevent crime since societies were first formed a couple million years ago (as tribes squatting in caves) this is quite a legal burden to put on businesses... But wait, there's more...

Oh well, you shrug, not my problem, I'm not in business..
Ah yes, Virginia, there is no Santa Claus - because the instant it is ruled that the airlines are responsible to prevent a crime now matter how ingenious the criminal, then the guy who breaks into your house and steals your big screen TV then crashes into another car and kills the occupants while fleeing from the police (with your TV) YOU become responsible for having not prevented the crime,,,

Now some barrister will jump in here poo-pooing me and saying I don't have a clue, that cannot possibly happen... I am here to tell you that in my observance of the changing of the legal and societal mores in this country since WWII, that it not only can happen, but it will happen if there is said ruling sent down from that court... Law suits that are considered just routine today, had they been filed in a court in my youth, the incredulous jurist would have wet himself laughing, just before he bellowed, "get his crap out of my court and don't come back with it, ever" and slammed the gavel down... Today the most incredible suits are filed and the court's clerk yawns as she enters them into the register...

As Smokey the pot blowing bear says, Only YOU can prevent crime...
 
Lets sue Homeland Security for not existing on 9/11 and preventing the attacks
 
Maybe sue the fuel company for providing the fuel in the aircraft!!
 
I am curious why the attorneys on the board never weigh in on these threads. :D

Maybe these law suits will force the airlines into bankruptcy so the government can bailout ALPA. Sound familiar?
 
Mafoo said:
me. :)

And I don't blame you, as you didn't really know. I only started this side conversation because the original person in this thread had made comments in another one, so I was poking fun back.
Click to expand...

Ah, now I understand. I stepped in the middle of something. :)
 
TommyG said:
Maybe sue the fuel company for providing the fuel in the aircraft!!
Click to expand...

Why stop there? Go after the manufacturers of the aluminum used to build the airplane..and the mining company that dug it up in the first place. Don't forget the grocery stores and food suppliers and farmers that fed them since they were born.

The airlines should sue that guy for having a building in a location that could be hit by an airplane. And then he should sue himself for owning a death trap that killed a lot of people.

Total crockup.

That whole thing was over a decade ago and people are still whining about it like it happened this morning. Yes, it was a bad thing. Remember what happened and whatever lessons can be learned from it then get over it. Move on with life.
 
fgcason said:
That whole thing was over a decade ago and people are still whining about it like it happened this morning. Yes, it was a bad thing. Remember what happened and whatever lessons can be learned from it then get over it. Move on with life.
Click to expand...
Aw, come on. There's no money to be made in that. People can milk the 9/11 attacks for many years to come. Lawsuits, commemorative kitsch, you name it.
 
DaleB said:
Aw, come on. There's no money to be made in that. Peoplelawyers can milk the 9/11 attacks for many years to come. Lawsuits, commemorative kitsch, you name it.
Click to expand...

ftfy.
 
Not just lawyers, but carpetbaggers and parasites of all types. I see the "9/11 commemorative coin, clad in pure whatever" guys have crawled from the woodwork again.
 
There's some interesting parallels with Product Liability lawsuits in this suit, if the airline "product" is safe passage.
 
denverpilot said:
There's some interesting parallels with Product Liability lawsuits in this suit, if the airline "product" is safe passage.
Click to expand...

That would be for the passengers.

Silverstein seems to claim strict liability regardless of cause.
 
They should arm the plaintiff with an automatic rifle and a large amount of ammunition and parachute drop him into Mecca.
 
MSPAviator said:
They should arm the plaintiff with an automatic rifle and a large amount of ammunition and parachute drop him into Mecca.
Click to expand...
Mecca would be pretty far down my list. Like any religion, I'm sure the vast majority of Muslims are not rabid, murdering vermin. There are a number of places where I'm sure a guy could get some justified and effective target practice. It won't, however, result in a big payday, which is what everyone is after. It's the money, not the outrage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top