Cirrus sued by Lidle's & Stanger's families

I guess we all knew this was gonna happen...

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable. They claim the feds' data show Cirrus
aircraft having a history of aileron failures and other accidents
involving flight control failures. I've read about quite a few Cirrus
accidents on this forum and don't recall anything about a control
system failure(?)

So they go after the engine mfr (did it quit on them?) and the
propeller mfr (did it fall off?) and the autopilot mfr (did George fly
them into the building?) The "Deep Pockets" theory is still in
effect I 'spose... Ugh. Our legal system needs an enema.

"Kingfish" wrote

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable.

They left out the company that made the bricks that the building was
constructed of, the City of New York for allowing it to be put there when it
is an obvious hazard to aircraft, the FAA for extending the VFR corridor up
the river that far, etc.

Gee, the only person they left out was the guy who's fault it probably was -
what a shocker.

BDS

On Mar 6, 8:07 am, "BDS" wrote:
"Kingfish" wrote

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable.

They left out the company that made the bricks that the building was
constructed of, the City of New York for allowing it to be put there when it
is an obvious hazard to aircraft, the FAA for extending the VFR corridor up
the river that far, etc.

Gee, the only person they left out was the guy who's fault it probably was -
what a shocker.

BDS

Bloody hell.. This is why the rest of the world thinks there is
something wrong with Americans! Anybody heard of personal
responsibility??

"chris" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 6, 8:07 am, "BDS" wrote:
"Kingfish" wrote

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable.

They left out the company that made the bricks that the building was
constructed of, the City of New York for allowing it to be put there when
it
is an obvious hazard to aircraft, the FAA for extending the VFR corridor
up
the river that far, etc.

Gee, the only person they left out was the guy who's fault it probably
was -
what a shocker.

BDS

Bloody hell.. This is why the rest of the world thinks there is
something wrong with Americans! Anybody heard of personal
responsibility??


If the plaintiff in a lawsuit had to pay for the defendants legal bills if
the plaintiff loses (like in Europe) most of this frivolous suing BS would
go away. Well I'm off to pour hot coffee all over my crotch.

--------------------------------------------
DW

On Mar 5, 12:58 pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"chris" wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 6, 8:07 am, "BDS" wrote:
"Kingfish" wrote

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable.

They left out the company that made the bricks that the building was
constructed of, the City of New York for allowing it to be put there when
it
is an obvious hazard to aircraft, the FAA for extending the VFR corridor
up
the river that far, etc.

Gee, the only person they left out was the guy who's fault it probably
was -
what a shocker.

BDS

Bloody hell.. This is why the rest of the world thinks there is
something wrong with Americans! Anybody heard of personal
responsibility??

If the plaintiff in a lawsuit had to pay for the defendants legal bills if
the plaintiff loses (like in Europe) most of this frivolous suing BS would
go away. Well I'm off to pour hot coffee all over my crotch.

Actually, if you want real legal reform all you would need to is to
cause punitive damages to go to someone/something other than the
claimant. The legal system makes the person whole through actual
damages (pain and suffering, lose of income, expenses, etc). Giving
punitive damages to this person never made any sense to me at all.
Allow attorneys to still collect a percentage of the punitive but the
rest should go somewhere else (even to the bottom of the ocean would
be better).

-Robert

Robert M. Gary opined

On Mar 5, 12:58 pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
If the plaintiff in a lawsuit had to pay for the defendants legal bills if
the plaintiff loses (like in Europe) most of this frivolous suing BS would
go away. Well I'm off to pour hot coffee all over my crotch.

Actually, if you want real legal reform all you would need to is to
cause punitive damages to go to someone/something other than the
claimant. The legal system makes the person whole through actual
damages (pain and suffering, lose of income, expenses, etc). Giving
punitive damages to this person never made any sense to me at all.
Allow attorneys to still collect a percentage of the punitive but the
rest should go somewhere else (even to the bottom of the ocean would
be better).

But who?

If punitive awards go to the state, it would become a revenue source. How long
would it take for every trial end up with punitive damages?

Giving the money to charities would be better, but I suspect that there would
still be problems.

Better to just ban punitive damages.



-ash
Cthulhu in 2007!
Why wait for nature?

Darkwing wrote:

If the plaintiff in a lawsuit had to pay for the defendants legal bills if
the plaintiff loses (like in Europe)

Canada

On Mar 5, 12:58 pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"chris" wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 6, 8:07 am, "BDS" wrote:
"Kingfish" wrote

I read this on AvWeb this morning - not only is Cirrus named in the
suit, but also Teledyne, Hartzel, S-Tec, Honeywell and Justice
Aviation (whoever they are). And this *before* the NTSB has determined
the cause. Unbelievable.

They left out the company that made the bricks that the building was
constructed of, the City of New York for allowing it to be put there when
it
is an obvious hazard to aircraft, the FAA for extending the VFR corridor
up
the river that far, etc.

Gee, the only person they left out was the guy who's fault it probably
was -
what a shocker.

BDS

Bloody hell.. This is why the rest of the world thinks there is
something wrong with Americans! Anybody heard of personal
responsibility??

If the plaintiff in a lawsuit had to pay for the defendants legal bills if
the plaintiff loses (like in Europe) most of this frivolous suing BS would
go away. Well I'm off to pour hot coffee all over my crotch.

Europe is getting much more litigious every day. I've seen estimates
that their legal system will be parallel to the U.S. in about 8 years.

-Robert

On 3/5/2007 3:08:03 PM, "chris" wrote:

This is why the rest of the world thinks there is
something wrong with Americans!

Um, it's not Americans, but rather the American legal system about which you
are complaining. As an American, I can tell you that I am just as ****ed off
about these types of lawsuits as perhaps the majority of us are. These types
of lawsuits have really changed our society for the worse over the last
thirty years.

If it makes you feel any better about some of us here, back in 1985 I was
riding my motorcycle down a two-lane street when an automobile pulled out of
a driveway and crossed right in front of me left to right. I was unable to
avoid the car, hit the driver's side door and catapulted over the top of the
car. It was clearly the other driver's fault.

The insurance company covered my lost income while I recovered, my medical
expenses, and damage to my motorcycle. I let it go at that and didn't bother
suing them for large amounts of pain and suffering despite the fact that it
would have been an open-and-shut case.


--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in
:

If it makes you feel any better about some of us here, back in 1985 I
was riding my motorcycle down a two-lane street when an automobile
pulled out of a driveway and crossed right in front of me left to right.
I was unable to avoid the car, hit the driver's side door and catapulted
over the top of the car. It was clearly the other driver's fault.

The insurance company covered my lost income while I recovered, my
medical expenses, and damage to my motorcycle. I let it go at that and
didn't bother suing them for large amounts of pain and suffering despite
the fact that it would have been an open-and-shut case.

In 1985 it might have been an open-and-shut case.

If that accident were to have happened today, you would have been lucky to
get off so easy - the attorneys for the driver of the other vehicle would
have taken everything as contingency for their suit against you...