Dear Fellow Sailplane Racers

wrote:


Perhaps one of the lawyers who attend this forum could comment
(hypothetically, of course and with appropriate disclaimers) on what
the FLARM groups' actual liability exposure in the US might be and
possible strategies for controlling it.

Does anyone know of any examples of any successful soaring-related
lawsuits? Their scarcity suggests that liability probably isn't a big
problem.

Greg Arnold wrote:

Does anyone know of any examples of any successful soaring-related
lawsuits? Their scarcity suggests that liability probably isn't a big
problem.

Statistics doesn't work on small numbers. It only takes one reckless
attorney finding one desperate relative and just one crazy jury honoring
an eorbitant claim to ruin a whole enterprize.

Stefan

Stefan wrote:
Greg Arnold wrote:

Does anyone know of any examples of any successful soaring-related
lawsuits? Their scarcity suggests that liability probably isn't a big
problem.


Statistics doesn't work on small numbers. It only takes one reckless
attorney finding one desperate relative and just one crazy jury honoring
an eorbitant claim to ruin a whole enterprize.

Stefan

Applebay Aviation producer of the Zuni sailplane was forced into
bankruptcy after a law suit was filed against it. The Law suit was
filed by the estate of a Zuni owner/pilot that was killed in a Zuni
Sailplane. The extensive accident investigation ascertained that the
structural failure was clearly caused by pilot error.

Greg:
Does anyone know of any examples of any successful soaring-related
lawsuits? Their scarcity suggests that liability probably isn't a
big problem.

Stefan:
Statistics doesn't work on small numbers. It only takes one reckless
attorney finding one desperate relative and just one crazy jury
honoring an eorbitant claim to ruin a whole enterprize.

Paul
Applebay Aviation producer of the Zuni sailplane was forced into
bankruptcy after a law suit was filed against it. The Law suit was
filed by the estate of a Zuni owner/pilot that was killed in a Zuni
Sailplane. The extensive accident investigation ascertained that the
structural failure was clearly caused by pilot error.

Setting up a company to make FLARM style units available in the US
should be a lot easier and less risky than sailplane production,
especially if the design can be obtained from FLARM. Production of the
units can be done by fabrication companies here or abroad, so the
"USLARM" entity would only manage the promotion and sales of the units.
The assets of the company would be small, making them unattractive to
sue and little lost if they were sued.

With several companies (Monroy, Surecheck, Proxalert) selling
transponder detectors without going bankrupt from law suits, it seems
there is precedent for selling warning devices without fear of financial
ruin. Maybe it's because proving the transponder detector was the cause
of an accident is really difficult? Or maybe since we are supposed to
fly VFR using "see and avoid", the performance of a warning device is
completely irrelevant?

So, with a low start-up cost and a very small liability risk, is all we
need are some champions to "just do it"?

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA