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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
Quoted from aero-news.net
"Plaintiffs who suffered losses when a Cirrus SR-20 crashed into a high-rise apartment building in Manhattan on October 11th, 2006 have dropped a $60 million lawsuit, and have agreed to settle for $2 million, according to the mediator in the case. The NTSB was unable to determine whether Cory Lidle, a pitcher for the New York Yankees, or his flight instructor, 26-year-old Tyler Stanger, was at the controls of the aircraft when it attempted a 180 degree turn in tight quarters and impacted the building. Several pedestrians were injured when debris fell from the crash site, and there were millions of dollars in property damage to the building. The online site Law.com reports that the plaintiffs dropped the suit because both Lidle and Stanger carried $1 million in life insurance, and their estates had "no other assets worth pursuing" in the case. One personal injury claimant did not accept the settlement. Lidle was a licensed pilot. The NTSB determined the cause of the accident to be "the pilots' inadequate planning, judgment and airmanship in trying to make a 180-degree turn led to the crash," but never determined precisely who was pilot-in-command. Law.com reports that the $2 million will be split between insurance companies that claim to have paid out $16.5 million for damages to the building and personal injury. A product liability suit has been filed against Cirrus by Lidle's widow and Stanger's estate, despite NTSB data that tends to indicate that the airframe was not a significant factor in the cause of this tragic accident." Nice to see common sense prevailed here. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
Kingfish wrote:
Quoted from aero-news.net "Plaintiffs who suffered losses when a Cirrus SR-20 crashed into a high-rise apartment building in Manhattan on October 11th, 2006 have dropped a $60 million lawsuit, and have agreed to settle for $2 million, according to the mediator in the case. The NTSB was unable to determine whether Cory Lidle, a pitcher for the New York Yankees, or his flight instructor, 26-year-old Tyler Stanger, was at the controls of the aircraft when it attempted a 180 degree turn in tight quarters and impacted the building. Several pedestrians were injured when debris fell from the crash site, and there were millions of dollars in property damage to the building. The online site Law.com reports that the plaintiffs dropped the suit because both Lidle and Stanger carried $1 million in life insurance, and their estates had "no other assets worth pursuing" in the case. One personal injury claimant did not accept the settlement. Lidle was a licensed pilot. The NTSB determined the cause of the accident to be "the pilots' inadequate planning, judgment and airmanship in trying to make a 180-degree turn led to the crash," but never determined precisely who was pilot-in-command. Law.com reports that the $2 million will be split between insurance companies that claim to have paid out $16.5 million for damages to the building and personal injury. A product liability suit has been filed against Cirrus by Lidle's widow and Stanger's estate, despite NTSB data that tends to indicate that the airframe was not a significant factor in the cause of this tragic accident." Nice to see common sense prevailed here. Common sense? You mean forgetting about the $60 million that was nowhere to be gotten and settling for the $2 million which was everything gettable? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
On Oct 7, 10:08*am, Kingfish wrote:
Quoted from aero-news.net "Plaintiffs who suffered losses when a Cirrus SR-20 crashed into a high-rise apartment building in Manhattan on October 11th, 2006 have dropped a $60 million lawsuit, and have agreed to settle for $2 million, according to the mediator in the case. The NTSB was unable to determine whether Cory Lidle, a pitcher for the New York Yankees, or his flight instructor, 26-year-old Tyler Stanger, was at the controls of the aircraft when it attempted a 180 degree turn in tight quarters and impacted the building. Several pedestrians were injured when debris fell from the crash site, and there were millions of dollars in property damage to the building. The online site Law.com reports that the plaintiffs dropped the suit because both Lidle and Stanger carried $1 million in life insurance, and their estates had "no other assets worth pursuing" in the case. One personal injury claimant did not accept the settlement. Lidle was a licensed pilot. The NTSB determined the cause of the accident to be "the pilots' inadequate planning, judgment and airmanship in trying to make a 180-degree turn led to the crash," but never determined precisely who was pilot-in-command. Law.com reports that the $2 million will be split between insurance companies that claim to have paid out $16.5 million for damages to the building and personal injury. A product liability suit has been filed against Cirrus by Lidle's widow and Stanger's estate, despite NTSB data that tends to indicate that the airframe was not a significant factor in the cause of this tragic accident." Nice to see common sense prevailed here. But who was the Pilot in Command? If this was a training flight, it would be the CFI. If it was just for fun, then whatever the two pilots agreed on prevails. By 91.3, the PIC has responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight, so he or his estate is the one who should be sued. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
On Oct 8, 7:58*am, Stubby wrote:
On Oct 7, 10:08*am, Kingfish wrote: Quoted from aero-news.net "Plaintiffs who suffered losses when a Cirrus SR-20 crashed into a high-rise apartment building in Manhattan on October 11th, 2006 have dropped a $60 million lawsuit, and have agreed to settle for $2 million, according to the mediator in the case. The NTSB was unable to determine whether Cory Lidle, a pitcher for the New York Yankees, or his flight instructor, 26-year-old Tyler Stanger, was at the controls of the aircraft when it attempted a 180 degree turn in tight quarters and impacted the building. Several pedestrians were injured when debris fell from the crash site, and there were millions of dollars in property damage to the building. The online site Law.com reports that the plaintiffs dropped the suit because both Lidle and Stanger carried $1 million in life insurance, and their estates had "no other assets worth pursuing" in the case. One personal injury claimant did not accept the settlement. Lidle was a licensed pilot. The NTSB determined the cause of the accident to be "the pilots' inadequate planning, judgment and airmanship in trying to make a 180-degree turn led to the crash," but never determined precisely who was pilot-in-command. Law.com reports that the $2 million will be split between insurance companies that claim to have paid out $16.5 million for damages to the building and personal injury. A product liability suit has been filed against Cirrus by Lidle's widow and Stanger's estate, despite NTSB data that tends to indicate that the airframe was not a significant factor in the cause of this tragic accident." Nice to see common sense prevailed here. But who was the Pilot in Command? *If this was a training flight, it would be the CFI. *If it was just for fun, then whatever the two pilots agreed on prevails. * By 91.3, the PIC has responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight, so he or his estate is the one who should be sued. The OP indicates rational analysis was used -- if there are no assets available, why sue? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Cory Lidle suit settled for $2M
In article
, Stubby wrote: But who was the Pilot in Command? If this was a training flight, it would be the CFI. If it was just for fun, then whatever the two pilots agreed on prevails. By 91.3, the PIC has responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight, so he or his estate is the one who should be sued. Does that regulation hold sway once the plane has smashed into something expensive and is thus no longer airborne? I'm no lawyer, but I think that the FAA can't regulate civil courts' actions regarding damage on the ground, and I could see reasoning in such a case where it's determined that the instructor has some civil liability because he was in a position of responsibility even if the FAA says that the other pilot was PIC. -- Mike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Recent C421 crash is related to Cory Lidle | jbskies | Piloting | 5 | December 5th 06 01:48 PM |
Winds A Factor In Lidle Crash | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 72 | November 10th 06 08:43 PM |
Lidle crash: who is wrong? | Blasto | Piloting | 57 | October 20th 06 08:05 AM |
Lidle, Langewiesche, and turns | Snidely | General Aviation | 16 | October 18th 06 03:10 AM |
Cory Lidle's Plane Crash into Building | [email protected] | Piloting | 1 | October 11th 06 11:00 PM |