![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bryan Martin" wrote in message ... in article , jls at wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM: I have never seen a judgment awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of negligence or defective design proximately causing the injury. You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the real world, you're living in a fantasy world. Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going to the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol. I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed to all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance and substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's always good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position, and you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow. In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions in other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects needing to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no such evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about as objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush. I just read another whiner complaining that the jury disregarded the NTSB report in the Carnahan case, but he is naive because ordinarily those reports, just like a highway patrolman's report of an auto accident, are and always have been inadmissible as evidence before a jury. I'd be willing the bet the jury never saw the NTSB report, so that guy is writing something deceptive, something to mislead the reader, in order to justify his position against the lawsuit. Then you hear, Oh, we're going to be priced out of the sky by these lawsuits. They're so frivolous, and so costly and we'll never be able to buy another gyro ever again, and oh the sky is falling and oh these trial lawyers are ruining the world, sucking the very lifeblood out of general aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100 million and she got 4. Big deal. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oshkosh Rec.Aviation Party Pictures | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 2 | December 30th 03 02:36 PM |
What are you guys using for cockpit lights these days? | Stealth Pilot | Home Built | 6 | December 9th 03 09:14 AM |
Wrong Brothers Air Force Party Invite | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 1 | July 20th 03 10:55 PM |