And now it starts. First lawsuit over 3407

[ctab5060X]

I'm sorry and excuse my language but this is

Why? Is there something special about this that makes it exempt to a lawsuit? No different than any other transportation related accidental death lawsuits.

There will be a settlement. This is a standard first step in getting that settlement, filing the lawsuit. For better or worse that is how the system works. If the company did the "right thing" that could be an admission of guilt. Bottom line, the passengers didn't get there safe and sound, and somebody's gotta pay. Fact of life, cost of business.

Agreed. This case will never go to trial. It will be settled out of court.

Shouldn't be any surprise, this is what always occurs, in any accident of any cause.

That said, people are going to have to be prepared for whatever probable cause and factors therein that come out of this accident. Whether it be aircraft related, WX related, navaid related, etc, or any combination therein; people are going to have to be open to any possibility, to include crew-error. I know the latter is not something that people with a personal stake in this particular accident want to have to face; but whatever the cause, everyone will need to acknowledge that cause and apply the lessons learned from it. That's best thing that can be taken from a tragedy like this one....the best that we as pilots can do for the sacrifice this crew, pax and one person on the ground made in this accident.

That is a very good statement. Unfortunately, sometimes for ALL the little things to be uncovered and change to occur, legal action must be taken. Keeps things from being "swept under the rug" so easily.

 

[ctab5060X]

I do not think the attorneys would press for the crews families to lose their homes, liquid cash, etc. I believe the attorneys wouldn't pursue the families that hard - unless the pilots had some kind of personal liability insurance that could be tapped. I think the attorneys are smart enough to only go after things that are insured and understand that the pilots themselves probably have pretty minimal assets. Pilot error would still tigger Colgan's insurance wouldn't it Velo? I mean, they are just as liable for pilot error as they would be for a maintainence error aren't they? What have you seen/know about that - wondering what has been done in the past.

Must not know very many attorneys, do you? j/k

As far as I know (at least in most cases I am familar with), you can't sue a dead person and you can't garnish the wages of said dead person who is no longer receiving wages.

The only way the pilots can be sued is if the families open an estate. Then the estate can be sued. However, a good attorney can handle this in a manner where the estate can be opened an no legal action can be brought.

 

[mshunter]

Must not know very many attorneys, do you? j/k

As far as I know (at least in most cases I am familar with), you can't sue a dead person and you can't garnish the wages of said dead person who is no longer receiving wages.

The only way the pilots can be sued is if the families open an estate. Then the estate can be sued. However, a good attorney can handle this in a manner where the estate can be opened an no legal action can be brought.

It has been done in the past where the estate has been sued. I just hope that the people who plan on suing, don't go after the surviving families of the crew. They have lost enough already. Neglagence or not, have respect for those who have suffered the same.

 

[seagull]

It could go to trial, just depends on if there is a legit offer on the table that is accepted. It might be that a judge and jury has to "settle it".

Initial lawsuit casts a wide net. It's easier to amend to remove defendants than it is to add them later.

Lawsuits take a long time. It's not so much a matter of getting in front of the line of others filing suit, so much as getting it resolved. Of course, earlier resolution increases the probability that the defendants will have something left to give you!

The legal system is what is used to get the system to change, for better or worse. The lack of liability would encourage companies (that, after all, exist to make profit) to cut corners.

Tgrayson is correct that NTSB findings are not admissible, but factual data that NTSB finds during the course of the investigation can be.

It's a tragic thing, but part of the process. The company is insured, and CO has liability because they did sell the ticket, afterall.

 

[WacoFan]

Must not know very many attorneys, do you? j/k

As far as I know (at least in most cases I am familar with), you can't sue a dead person and you can't garnish the wages of said dead person who is no longer receiving wages.

The only way the pilots can be sued is if the families open an estate. Then the estate can be sued. However, a good attorney can handle this in a manner where the estate can be opened an no legal action can be brought.

Excellent points. And, yes - I know many attorneys and would agree that they are generally predatory - and that is my generous description of the two out of probably hundred that I actually like! Reason for my comment is that many of these shark-people would quckly surmise that the regional pilots had few assets, little wealth, large debt and therefore wouldn't be particularly good targets because the lawyer would see little cash for his time. (This is a gross generalization basd upon reading 14 months of posts about regional guys living in a van at their reserve base, eating ramen, etc.)

One thing that would potentially generate some learning here at JC is a thread that could talk about liability issues that a pro-pilot faces and more importantly how to arrange your affairs in such a manner that you can safeguard your family/estate. I think the freight dogs are probably less liable than most, but the regional and major guys certainly have liability. Even if your estate is named in the suit your family has to hire a lawyer to defend it, and that is an expense. So...l am not sure of the liability issues the individual pilots face, but it would be a handy topic to cover. Perhaps ALPA has some info on this and maybe PCL could share some tips. Barring that, perhaps someone knows a good aviation attorney that would come on and make a post about steps a pilot could take to safeguard the assets and family.

 

[ctab5060X]

It could go to trial, just depends on if there is a legit offer on the table that is accepted. It might be that a judge and jury has to "settle it".

Not entirely accurate. There is one little thing that really keeps this stuff from going to trial. Money. That's right money. Not the kind you might end up be awarded, but what you can lose. If the case goes to court and you lose by some freaky chance, then you can be obligated to pay opposing councils attorney fees that have been accumulating for many months. It is not a risk that good attorneys are going to take. Unless they are 110% sure they are going to win, then they will settle out of court. It might be settled on the steps of the courthouse as the parties are walking up, but it will be settled.

One thing that would potentially generate some learning here at JC is a thread that could talk about liability issues that a pro-pilot faces and more importantly how to arrange your affairs in such a manner that you can safeguard your family/estate. I think the freight dogs are probably less liable than most, but the regional and major guys certainly have liability. Even if your estate is named in the suit your family has to hire a lawyer to defend it, and that is an expense. So...l am not sure of the liability issues the individual pilots face, but it would be a handy topic to cover. Perhaps ALPA has some info on this and maybe PCL could share some tips. Barring that, perhaps someone knows a good aviation attorney that would come on and make a post about steps a pilot could take to safeguard the assets and family.

That is a really good point.

Like you said, maybe PCL or Velo can chime in on this as well. Curious here (because I don't know). If you work for an ALPA carrier and are killed while working (or on duty), will ALPA help the immediate family at all with providing or finding an attorney?

Maybe we can get someone at Network JC this year to talk about pilot liability... just a thought.

 

[RightSeatGirl]

Haven't situations like this brought down small airlines in the past when the settlement amounts ran too big for insurance to cover all? Lot's of good peeps at Colgan...I hope this does not kill the company.

 

[JK7177]

I've always been kind of confused with sueing after something like this, it almost seems to insult the memory of the person you lost by puting a dollar amount on their worth. It seems to be a no brainer that the pilots didn't want to crash the aircraft and did everything in their power to make that happen, sueing the pilot will only distress the family who also lost a loved one.

 

[youngflyer]

I am confused. I thought that the airlines, or their insurance, is required to pay out 5 million to the members of the victims family or am I mistaken?

 

[ctab5060X]

I've always been kind of confused with sueing after something like this, it almost seems to insult the memory of the person you lost by puting a dollar amount on their worth. It seems to be a no brainer that the pilots didn't want to crash the aircraft and did everything in their power to make that happen, sueing the pilot will only distress the family who also lost a loved one.

Would you feel any different if it was your own loved one?


Do you have life insurance? If so, then you are putting a value on your own life as well. It is not us, it is the insurance companies that place the value on human life.


It is not insulting to their memory... TRUST ME on this one.


For once in recent history, we have a LEGITIMATE lawsuit, not the frivolous "I spilled my coffee at McDonald's" crap. It is lawsuits like this that bring attention to inadequacies in corporate policy and procedure. By bringing attention to these inadequacies, then corporations can possibly be held accountable, thus leading to possible changes in not only corporate policy and procedure, but possibly the regulations that govern the policy and procedures of the corporation.

 

[t-cart]

Sorry about your dad Ctab.

 

[WacoFan]

Sorry about your dad Ctab.

:yeahthat:Me too Ctab.

 

[SeatClutcher]

I've always been kind of confused with sueing after something like this, it almost seems to insult the memory of the person you lost by puting a dollar amount on their worth.

I was just thinking suing someone would keep your mind busy, give you a purpose, make you feel like you're DOING something about it, when really, you've no control over what happened. I wonder how much of the motivation behind suing is as simple as not knowing how else to deal with the loss.

 

[Malko]

Would you feel any different if it was your own loved one?


Do you have life insurance? If so, then you are putting a value on your own life as well. It is not us, it is the insurance companies that place the value on human life.


It is not insulting to their memory... TRUST ME on this one.


For once in recent history, we have a LEGITIMATE lawsuit, not the frivolous "I spilled my coffee at McDonald's" crap. It is lawsuits like this that bring attention to inadequacies in corporate policy and procedure. By bringing attention to these inadequacies, then corporations can possibly be held accountable, thus leading to possible changes in not only corporate policy and procedure, but possibly the regulations that govern the policy and procedures of the corporation.

Serious question...have you read or looked over anything regarding the McD case....? While the headlines (soundbites) seem ridiculous, when you look at the actual case it makes much easier to understand than, "Next on News7...."

Back to the regular scheduled programming....

 

[ctab5060X]

Serious question...have you read or looked over anything regarding the McD case....? While the headlines (soundbites) seem ridiculous, when you look at the actual case it makes much easier to understand than, "Next on News7...."

Back to the regular scheduled programming....

Actually I have. I was using the "urban legend" portion of it in order to make a point. Most people will know what you are talking about when you mention it, and a lot of Americans don't know the details, thus thinking it is a good example of what is wrong with our legal system.

It actually had good basis, and there was a reason to fault the defendant, but not to the tune of the initial 2.7 million dollars (later reduced to less than half a million) and no corporate change with McDonald's on the temperature of their coffee. Guess it would be a good example of the good and the bad of our legal system.

 

[RightSeatGirl]

The real problem here is that too many civil court judges will hear just about any kind of suit no matter how absurd or frivolous. This is where we come in as voters and why it's important to be involved in even the smallest local elections. Most people don't even think about the fact that we the people have failed to demand higher standards from our system of justice. We fail to vote out judges who make it a hobby to hear frivolous cases and we fail to demand better from our representatives when it come to creating legislation that limits settlement amounts. It's apathy folks..we have no one to blame but ourselves. What I would term ethical and morally justified lawsuits (suits based on actual conscientious gross negligence etc.) are few and far between. We try way too hard to create economic consequence for accidents. We think we can sue our way into having a 100% safe country and safe life. The notion of course is ludicrous. An informed consenting adult boards an aircraft, the aircraft has a one in a million crash, the person dies. Now families want to profit over death becuase they feel monetary compensation will subdue grief and loss. It all goes back to greed and the asinine belief that money buys happiness. This is a whopping societal failure people. You get on a plane or hop into a car you should be smart enough to realize you are taking a chance and are putting yourself into a situation where any number of a million different things can go wrong and result in death or injury. To blame others for your decision or the decision of a loved one to do so is sad but understandable, to demand payment for an "accident" that was as far from intentional or actually negligent as it can be is down right F'd up! And this mentality has directly contributed to why many things have become ridiculously expensive. No body wants to take responsibility for their own decisions. No wonder the rest of the world has such a poor opinion of Americans.

 

[ctab5060X]

The real problem here is that too many civil court judges will hear just about any kind of suit no matter how absurd or frivolous. This is where we come in as voters and why it's important to be involved in even the smallest local elections. Most people don't even think about the fact that we the people have failed to demand higher standards from our system of justice. We fail to vote out judges who make it a hobby to hear frivolous cases and we fail to demand better from our representatives when it come to creating legislation that limits settlement amounts. It's apathy folks..we have no one to blame but ourselves. What I would term ethical and morally justified lawsuits (suits based on actual conscientious gross negligence etc.) are few and far between. We try way too hard to create economic consequence for accidents. We think we can sue our way into having a 100% safe country and safe life. The notion of course is ludicrous. An informed consenting adult boards an aircraft, the aircraft has a one in a million crash, the person dies. Now families want to profit over death becuase they feel monetary compensation will subdue grief and loss. It all goes back to greed and the asinine belief that money buys happiness. This is a whopping societal failure people. You get on a plane or hop into a car you should be smart enough to realize you are taking a chance and are putting yourself into a situation where any number of a million different things can go wrong and result in death or injury. To blame others for your decision or the decision of a loved one to do so is sad but understandable, to demand payment for an "accident" that was as far from intentional or actually negligent as it can be is down right F'd up! And this mentality has directly contributed to why many things have become ridiculously expensive. No body wants to take responsibility for their own decisions. No wonder the rest of the world has such a poor opinion of Americans.

So when corporate America, so consumed with greed will hook up the cable portion of their TV antenna to the new generator and not the FCC required lights...

Yeah sure, I am going to tell myself that I am a failure to society because my family decided to file a lawsuit when no one was "intentionally or actually negligent". Sure whatever.

It was not "greed" and it sure wasn't happiness when it settled.

You say nobody wants to take responsibility fore their own decisions... that door swings both ways. Corporate America won't admit fault on their own, thus the need for lawsuits like this.

 

[WacoFan]

So when corporate America, so consumed with greed will hook up the cable portion of their TV antenna to the new generator and not the FCC required lights...

Yeah sure, I am going to tell myself that I am a failure to society because my family decided to file a lawsuit when no one was "intentionally or actually negligent". Sure whatever.

It was not "greed" and it sure wasn't happiness when it settled.

You say nobody wants to take responsibility fore their own decisions... that door swings both ways. Corporate America won't admit fault on their own, thus the need for lawsuits like this.

:yeahthat:

 

[RightSeatGirl]

So when corporate America, so consumed with greed will hook up the cable portion of their TV antenna to the new generator and not the FCC required lights...

Yeah sure, I am going to tell myself that I am a failure to society because my family decided to file a lawsuit when no one was "intentionally or actually negligent". Sure whatever.

It was not "greed" and it sure wasn't happiness when it settled.

You say nobody wants to take responsibility fore their own decisions... that door swings both ways. Corporate America won't admit fault on their own, thus the need for lawsuits like this.

So let's punish a corporation because it's employees had an accident, or a retainer bolt on a type IIA widget broke loose, caused an engine failure and killed 100 people? Dude! This stuff is nobody's fault! It is just going to happen from time to time..frankly..the point of your post is lost on me. If a corporation blatantly disregards safe practices, maintenance etc...and a crash results, then hammer em till their broke! But awarding millions dollars for an ACCIDENT! is insane!

My point is suing over an accident where no negligence was present is not right. It's become the thing to do in America...Are we better off for it? Are you safer in your SUV driving down the road? Less likely to be a victim in a plane crash because someone might get sued? Fraid not dude...This is greed, plain and simple...Someone else has to pay for my decesion...naww holmes...you are not gonna ever be able to justify that no matter how many idiot judges allow those kinds of suits to be heard, won and settlements awarded.

I.E. Point: why do you think there are no high dive boards at swim clubs anymore? Because we want to blame the swim club for the decision we made to jump off the thing! And now we want them to pay because we were too stupid to realize we lacked the good judgment necessary to prevent us from doin the triple lindy of the damn thing to impress the chick in the string bikini sittin next to the dive basin? This isn't right...if you think it is...then there is nothing even remotely mature or civil I can say to that so I'll reserve comment. Money will not you make the loss of a loved one any easier..if you believe that..I feel sorry for you. The corporate greed issue is something different entirely.

 

[Firebird2XC]

You can bet Colgan, Continental and Bombardier are pressing for a finding of pilot error.

You can also bet the lawyers are praying for a finding of no pilot error.

Because if the pilots are not found to be at fault, the deep pockets of Colgan, Continental and Bombardier will certainly be plumbed for the most cash the ambulance chasers can get.

TA-DA!

Just like I've been saying FOR WEEKS.

Thanks for sayin' that. Nice to know I'm not alone in this.

I really hope that the pilots are found free of any wrong-doing and the public acknowledges that. If somebody in the management group IS to blame, I hope the heads roll appropriately.

I think the crew has already more than paid their share for the situation, as is.