Comair Accident pilot sues...

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

So, how much do you think YOU are goinf to save if the FO doesn't do
what he needs to do to defend himself?

What has the FO been charged with?

....defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.

What it boils down to is which insurance company is going to pay what.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

...defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.


Those would be valid claims, his suit is not.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

...defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.


Those would be valid claims, his suit is not.


I concur...but I am biased.

Ron Lee

In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

Those would be valid claims, his suit is not.

I concur...but I am biased.

Being biased and correct are not mutually exclusive.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel wrote in
:

Being biased and correct are not mutually exclusive.

I agree but the attorneys are looking for ignorant.


--

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

Those would be valid claims, his suit is not.

I concur...but I am biased.

Being biased and correct are not mutually exclusive.


No but being knowledgeable and being a juror in the US are mutually
exclusive.

Matt

In article ,
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
So, how much do you think YOU are goinf to save if the FO doesn't do
what he needs to do to defend himself?

What has the FO been charged with?

...defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.

What it boils down to is which insurance company is going to pay what.


It seems that if he's responsible, the claims against him are valid. He
should accept responsibility and not try to shift blame onto someone
else. Keep in mind that companies don't pay for anything, every dollar
a company spends comes out of YOUR pocket.




JKG

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
In article ,
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
So, how much do you think YOU are goinf to save if the FO doesn't do
what he needs to do to defend himself?
What has the FO been charged with?
...defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.

What it boils down to is which insurance company is going to pay what.


It seems that if he's responsible, the claims against him are valid. He
should accept responsibility and not try to shift blame onto someone
else. Keep in mind that companies don't pay for anything, every dollar
a company spends comes out of YOUR pocket.

This brings up an interesting question. Do
airlines generally cover personal claims against
their employees? I would think that unless a
crime was committed, they would.

In article ,
Jim Stewart wrote:
This brings up an interesting question. Do
airlines generally cover personal claims against
their employees? I would think that unless a
crime was committed, they would.

Either way, it doesn't matter--you still pay for it.

I would agree that where there's negligence (as it appears there was in
this case), individuals and companies should be held accountable. But
who is really going to win in these lawsuits? Most likely, the lawyers
win and you (a completely uninvolved individual) pay for it.



JKG

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
In article ,
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
So, how much do you think YOU are goinf to save if the FO doesn't
do what he needs to do to defend himself?

What has the FO been charged with?

...defend himself from the possible civil claims against him.

What it boils down to is which insurance company is going to pay
what.


It seems that if he's responsible, the claims against him are valid.
He should accept responsibility and not try to shift blame onto
someone else. Keep in mind that companies don't pay for anything,
every dollar a company spends comes out of YOUR pocket.


If his lawyers didn't do everything possible to shift at least some of the
liability from their client they would be guilty of malpractice. And it
isn't just the FO that is sueing it is the widow of the captain as well.

And to say that companies don't pay for anything is silly. Comair for
example doesn't operate in a vacume. They can't raise thier fares just
because they get hit with a liability suit.

If you continue your logic out, nothing comes out of your pocket either
because you got your money from somewhere and so they are really footing the
bill.