Family awarded $3.5 million in Citation crash

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
The courts really ought to require that all the facts are in before allowing
the suits to go forward.

From AOPA
A February 2005 crash has resulted in a $3.5 million out-of-court settlement
for the family of a Circuit City buyer who was a passenger on the flight to
Pueblo Memorial Airport, Colorado.

There's not much the courts can do about *out-of-court* settlements
made voluntarily by the parties involved.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The courts really ought to require that all the facts are in before allowing
the suits to go forward.

An out-of-court settlement never sees a court, which is why it's
called an _out-of-court_ settlement.

I wonder why Circuit City and Martinair caved in so easily. What did
they do that makes them liable for anything?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
An out-of-court settlement never sees a court, which is why
it's called an _out-of-court_ settlement.

Wrong again. An out-of-court settlement can be reached between
the litigating parties at any time ("out-of-court") during the
litigating process, if the plaintiff has commenced litigation.
How is it that you can be an expert on absolutely everything?

F--

TxSrv writes:

Wrong again. An out-of-court settlement can be reached between
the litigating parties at any time ("out-of-court") during the
litigating process, if the plaintiff has commenced litigation.

The essential point is that the court does not make the decision. The
decision is made outside the court.

How is it that you can be an expert on absolutely everything?

I can't. But I know useful things about a lot of topics.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
news

I can't. But I know useful things about a lot of topics.

You certainly have not shown that to be true on this venue.

Mxsmanic wrote:

I wonder why Circuit City and Martinair caved in so easily. What did
they do that makes them liable for anything?

They became defendants in an aviation-related accident. The odds are
stacked against them if a jury sees it. Facts no longer matter.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The courts really ought to require that all the facts are in before allowing
the suits to go forward.

An out-of-court settlement never sees a court, which is why it's
called an _out-of-court_ settlement.

I wonder why Circuit City and Martinair caved in so easily. What did
they do that makes them liable for anything?


What makes you think they weren't? The casual evidence points more
to them being responsible than Cessna.

Ron Natalie writes:

What makes you think they weren't?

The presumption of innocence.

The casual evidence points more to them being responsible than Cessna.

What exactly happened?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Ron Natalie writes:

What makes you think they weren't?

The presumption of innocence.

The casual evidence points more to them being responsible than Cessna.

What exactly happened?

They flew around in rime icing conditions for an extended period
waiting to get approach clearance.

Ron Natalie writes:

They flew around in rime icing conditions for an extended period
waiting to get approach clearance.

What should they have done? Can you declare an emergency in a
situation like that? Should they have done so?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.