The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!

jls wrote:

I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of negligence
or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

Larry Dighera wrote in message . ..
On 25 Jun 2004 13:05:04 -0700, (Sam) wrote:

The people in this group and at Jay's party would likely beat the
sh&t out of anyone trying to do it.

Ah, you bring nearly the same dearth of statesmanship and eloquence to
this newsgroup as that Vice President Dick Cheney recently brought to
the floor of the Senate. :-(

Yeah, yeah, I know... Hardly an "eloquent" solution. Think about it
though Larry, I know you've been around here a long time, what would
happen if some guy (or girl, whatever) got all sloshed at Jay's hotel.
You think those people like J. Fisher and Capt Doug would be like
"hey, have a great flight!"? I think those guys would seriously put a
quick end to any intoxicated plans (mild as they may be!). Then
again, I haven't met too many people here, so I'm just kinda
guessing...

Sam

I've heard some great
stories about camping next to your plane with lots of other pilots doing
the
same thing - sounds like 'heaven' to me grin.

"This ain't heaven...it's Oshkosh"

OSH is the closest thing to heaven on earth I've found. I start dreaming
about it in February, and start getting anxious in May.

By now, I'm just crawling out of my skin, having a hard time waiting that
one more month!

Remember that feeling before Christmas, when you were a kid? That
absolutely, can't-stand-the-wait feeling?

That's Oshkosh!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Bryan Martin" wrote in message
...
in article , jls at
wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM:

I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
negligence
or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the
real
world, you're living in a fantasy world.

Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going to
the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be
thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol.

I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed to
all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance and
substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's always
good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position, and
you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or
owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow.

In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin
gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions in
other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects needing
to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of
liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no such
evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could
hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about as
objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush.

I just read another whiner complaining that the jury disregarded the NTSB
report in the Carnahan case, but he is naive because ordinarily those
reports, just like a highway patrolman's report of an auto accident, are and
always have been inadmissible as evidence before a jury. I'd be willing
the bet the jury never saw the NTSB report, so that guy is writing something
deceptive, something to mislead the reader, in order to justify his position
against the lawsuit.

Then you hear, Oh, we're going to be priced out of the sky by these
lawsuits. They're so frivolous, and so costly and we'll never be able to
buy another gyro ever again, and oh the sky is falling and oh these trial
lawyers are ruining the world, sucking the very lifeblood out of general
aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
million and she got 4. Big deal.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


jls wrote:

I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of
negligence
or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's. You been hearing too
much spin from the Parker-Hannifin crowd, too much propaganda from their
friends, too much of the take from the GA crowd who think that everytime
there is a judgment it has left a great oozing lesion on their pocketbooks
and has taken GA to the brink of devastation. Besides, after getting a
paltry 4 million dollar judgment against it, instead of the BIG money the
Carnahans were going for, P-H said it was vindicated. So be happy.

jls wrote...

If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's.

The Parker-Hannifin case was in regards to the vacuum pumps,
not the gyros. Evidence and analysis indicates that both
pumps were functional at impact, and were not a factor in
the crash. They didn't settle, as you suggested elsewhere,
but the Carnahan crowd was awarded far less than what they
were asking.

Dave 'and she asked for my vote' Hyde

jls wrote:

"Bryan Martin" wrote in message
...

in article , jls at
wrote on 6/25/04 9:34 PM:


I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of

negligence

or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You need to get your nose out of those law books and take a look at the

real

world, you're living in a fantasy world.


Ah, my partisan friend, you need to furnish evidence it -- a case going to
the jury without evidence of negligence -- has happened, otherwise be
thought of as shooting from the hip with a $2 pistol.

I haven't read much law since taking the bar in the 70's, haven't needed to
all that much, but I've learned people's "facts" often lack substance and
substantiation, and will twist the facts to suit their purpose. It's always
good then to consider what one has at stake when one takes a position, and
you rarely if ever have a pilot or CFI or aircraft owner or engineer or
owner of an FBO taking the side of a plaintiff like the Carnahan widow.

In the Carnahan case there was indeed testimony that the Parker-Hannifin
gyro failed, that P-H gyros had performance problems on other occasions in
other aircraft, and therefore P-H had notice of a defect or defects needing
to be cured. At any rate P-H settled, constituting an admission of
liability. The other character in this thread saying there was no such
evidence is hanging his hat on AOPA's take of the evidence. You could
hardly say THEY are objective at AOPA in these controversies ---- about as
objective as Michael Moore is about George Bush.

Unfortunately, many, maybe even most, companies settle even if they
don't think they are liable. They make a business decision that weighs
the cost of defense against the cost of a settlement, and then choose
the least expensive option. There have been many studies since the
silicone breast implant case was brought and settled and every study so
far shows no indication of a connection between the health problems the
women suffered and their silicone implants. The reason that Dow-Corning
settled is that the projected cost of defending lawsuits in virtually
every state in the union was simply mind boggling. And, they actually
won most of the initial suits prior to the class action being formed.
The issue wasn't liability, it was cost of defense.


Matt

jls wrote:

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


jls wrote:

I have never seen a judgment
awarded to an injured plaintiff when there wasn't some proof of

negligence

or defective design proximately causing the injury.

You haven't been paying attention to the Parker-Hanefin case, I take it?

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.


If I were going to merchandise a mechanical gyro, George, I'd use 2004
technology, not ancient stuff from out of the 50's. You been hearing too
much spin from the Parker-Hannifin crowd, too much propaganda from their
friends, too much of the take from the GA crowd who think that everytime
there is a judgment it has left a great oozing lesion on their pocketbooks
and has taken GA to the brink of devastation. Besides, after getting a
paltry 4 million dollar judgment against it, instead of the BIG money the
Carnahans were going for, P-H said it was vindicated. So be happy.

I'd be curious to know what P-H's volume is and how much this will be
per unit they ship. Given that the volumes are generally quite low in
GA as compared to say the automotive world, I'll bet this $4MM is a lot
more significant than you think. We're not talking about companies that
sell millions of units a year.


Matt

----- Original Message -----
From: " jls"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!



aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
million and she got 4. Big deal.

Well, if 4 million is not a big deal as you infer, Please send me 400,000
which should be chump change!

"Cy Galley" wrote in message
news:%SADc.100823$2i5.78190@attbi_s52...
----- Original Message -----
From: " jls"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: The OSH Pool Party is just 30 days away!



aviation. Well buuuullll ****. The widow Carnahan was looking for 100
million and she got 4. Big deal.

Well, if 4 million is not a big deal as you infer, Please send me 400,000
which should be chump change!

How do you want it, cash, cheque, draft, or money order?