Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Sued Over Crash In Kirksville  
User currently offlineQqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2272 posts, RR: 13
Posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5536 times:

American, Corporate and Trans States Airlines were all sued today by the daughter of a woman who was killed in the Corporate Airlines crash in Kirksville. The Corporate flight was operating as American Connection from St. Louis to Kirksville when it crashed just prior to landing in poor weather.

What is AA's culpability in a case like this? The lawsuit claims passengers were misled into believing the flight was operated by AA, with AA metal and flown by AA pilots. It also claims all three airlines played a part in allowing the doomed flight to be dispatched when the weather was poor. They also claim pilot fatigue may have been a factor.

Why Trans States was sued, I don't understand. The attorney claims they, too, are culpable, because Trans States provides ground handling for Corporate. Trans States said they do provide ground handling, such as passenger boarding, but not maintenance or training.


The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlairport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5515 times:

Corperate might have to flight, but AA and Trans States will defiently get off the hook here....
every time AA has a codeshare flight, it says OPERATED BY_________ or the reservations agent says: "This flight is OPERATED BY_________!
and Trans States has no involvement. They don't dispatch!


User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 691 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5469 times:

Its simple. Sue them all and let God sort em out. All good attorney will sue every possible plaintiff. As I recall, doesn't AMR own all of their regional carriers?

User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32691 posts, RR: 72
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5452 times:

As I recall, doesn't AMR own all of their regional carriers?

No. They own only American Eagle and Executive Airlines. They don't own any of the American Connection carriers that are based out of St. Louis.



a.
User currently offlineLoggat From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5440 times:

Kellmark: As I recall, doesn't AMR own all of their regional carriers?

Nope, AMR owns Eagle. Corporate, Trans States, Chautauqua are separate contract carriers out of St. Louis under the American Connection banner.



There are 3 types of people in this world, those that can count, and those that can't.
User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5437 times:

All good attorney will sue every possible plaintiff who has a lot of money




User currently offlineLoggat From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5435 times:

whoops, too slow...

filler



There are 3 types of people in this world, those that can count, and those that can't.
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5415 times:

1- I am not a lawyer, so if anyone wants to correct me...

2- From what I've seen reading the opinions issued lawsuits from previous accidents, it is common practice to sue anyone who had contact with the aircraft. Part of the theory is that by taking care of them all on the same lawsuit someone gets hit with the blame and a recovery can be made-- For example, if they sued Corporate Airlines and in that trial it was decided that they were just doing things the way American told them to so then the families sued American and lost that case because American used the argument that "Corporate should have known it was unsafe and done things differently" they would be unable to resue Corporate (double jeopardy)

3- It's far from unheard of for negligent ground handling (and I'm talking normal ground handling, not MX) to wind up causing a bird to come down so it's within the realm of possibility that Trans States did something to cause the crash (i.e. leaving a door open, improperly loading the baggage holds, etc.). I just read the accident report on an Electra crash from 1984 where the cause was the fueller leaving the door open and the resulting vibrations.

4- Regarding "Operated By" I have never had a res agent tell me that a flight was operated by a 3rd party.* Also, I don't think many people not associated with the airline industry in some way really understand what the term "Operated By" means, even if they saw/heard it somewhere. (and if they bought an e-Ticket over the phone, it is entirely possible that they didn't see any paper until getting to the airport) Think of it from a regular passenger's perspective: You show up at the airport, you go to a counter with "American" (or "American Connection" over it), you get a boarding pass that says "American Airlines" on it (with the "Operated by" notation) you look at American Airlines flight monitors, go to the gate where the announcement is made that "American Connection flight 1234 for XYZ is now boarding", you board an aircraft that has the American logo on the side, read American's inflight mag, even (assuming they're like DL and NW) get napkins and cups with American's logo on them. Add to this the fact that the "other" commuter carrier (Eagle) is AA owned and operated... The airlines try pretty hard to associate the commuter airlines with the mainline, and in doing so open themselves up to exactly this claim-- that pax THOUGHT they'd be flown by a mainline crew.


Lincoln

*- Once had an AS agent argue with me that it wasn't a 3rd party, it really was AS. I then asked why the website said that it was Operated by American Airlines and she conceded.

[Edited 2005-01-29 03:48:56]


CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5413 times:

What is AA's culpability in a case like this? The lawsuit claims passengers were misled into believing the flight was operated by AA, with AA metal and flown by AA pilots

Perhaps it's a case of "when we practice to deceive, what a tangled web we weave." Even though I (for one) do not believe for one nanosecond that AA actually "practiced to deceive" in this case, the fact remains that no matter how one chooses to spin it, the doomed flight carried an AA flight number, which is inherently misleading.

It was none other than "the patron saint" of AA himself, Bob Crandall, who was quoted about 10 years ago as speaking the truth on this issue with the succinct words: "code shares are deceptive." Wonder if this will be brought up in the hearing or trial of this case?


User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5360 times:

Ohh geez you have got to be kidding me!!! AA and TSA should NOT be involved in the lawsuit!! Only Corporate. And if the customers were lead to believe it was flown by AA Metal, they are blind, can they not read? Also the daughter may have not known but possibly, the paxs had known. I hope they get it figured out, im due to fly Corporate, American, AND Trans States to OKC  Big grin And I DO KNOW which is which.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineTWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5340 times:

The argument isn't going to pass muster because the plaintiff will need to prove that AMR and Corporate deliberately misled the passengers in order to defraud them, and that because the passengers were defrauded or misled, they flew on the plane when they otherwise wouldn't have... I think that would be pretty hard to prove.

(edited for typo)

[Edited 2005-01-29 04:37:02]


An unexamined life isn't worth living.
User currently offlineMoman From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5338 times:

Well in this day and age of litigation, I'm not surpised.

On the e-ticket receipt, it clearly says "Operated by American ___". Even the old TWA jets used to say "Operated by TWA" up until last Sept.

Flying in a pressurized metal tube is inherently dangerous. I wish there were tort reform to keep these kind of lawsuits from financially ruining companies. A limit of 1 million/pax in damages is more than enough, per occurence.

Moman



AA Platinum Member - American Airlines Forever
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5692 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5304 times:

why dont we ask those two who survived and ask if they knew they were NOT flying with American Airlines metal tubes...

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineNorthwestair From Poland, joined Jul 2001, 648 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5278 times:

Most likely it stated on the side of the A/C operated by Coperate Airlines. It's like Northwest Airlink and then right below that it states Operated by Mesaba. Also it states on your itinerary Operated by xyz airline


I don't care who you fly just as long as you fly
User currently offlineThunder9 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 219 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5278 times:

ALso, when was the last time that AA metal served Kirksville, MO? This will likely never go to trial, but if it did, would a jury believe that the passenger (who can't testify, obviously) didn't realize that AA doesn't serve that tiny little airport? I don't think that the plaintiff(s) will be able to prove that AA was deceptive, especially where codeshares are nothing new these days...Heck, even WN has jumped on the bandwagon!  Smile

-J



"Keep thy airspeed up, less the earth come from below and smite thee." - William Kershner
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5242 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

I wish there were tort reform to keep these kind of lawsuits from financially ruining companies.

Isn't Bush lobbying for something like this? As much as I dislike the man, I'd strongly support such an action. I strongly believe out-of-control litigation will be the death of our country.


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineFourstripe From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5082 times:

I agree with the general train of thought here. This frivolous lawsuit should be illegal. Although it is a great tragedy when an aircraft goes down and loved ones are lost, I do feel that lawyers tend to take advantage of people's grief. I am sure that the airlines have done everything possible to help the loss with regard to the families of the pax on that corporate flight. This is just another attempt by a lawyer to suck as much money from a plaintiff as possible.

-fourstripe



“Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.” - Edward Vernon Rickenbacker
User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5025 times:

Isn't Bush lobbying for something like this? As much as I dislike the man, I'd strongly support such an action. I strongly believe out-of-control litigation will be the death of our country.

Yes indeed, its from Senator Edwards raping health care providers for moneys.


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4965 times:

Of these parties, the only one that should be sued is C3, since it was their a/c and their flight crew. Just because Corporate operates services for American doesn't mean that American shares any or the responsiblity or blame for an incident involving a contract carrier operating on behalf of AA. Trans State would only be a liable party if it was found during the course of the NTSB investigation that the actions of one of its' employees was a contributing factor in the crash (Which based on the preliminary NTSB report, appears to be unlikely.).

Now for the codeshare issue. I thought that it was now required to inform passengers at the time of booking if a flight was going to be operated by another airline. When you book online, they tell you if a flight is operated by another airline. And airline ads in the newspaper usually will have on the bottom of the ad (In fine print that people don't normally read anyway.) that certains flights may be operated by such and such airlines or by a codeshare partner.


User currently offlineGothamSpotter From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 586 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4932 times:

Why Trans States was sued, I don't understand. The attorney claims they, too, are culpable, because Trans States provides ground handling for Corporate. Trans States said they do provide ground handling, such as passenger boarding, but not maintenance or training.

Since the final NTSB report on the crash has not yet been released, naming every possible at fault party as defendants is necessary.

I wish there were tort reform to keep these kind of lawsuits from financially ruining companies. A limit of 1 million/pax in damages is more than enough, per occurence.

Tort reform is necessary, but protecting airlines is a negligible reason for it. There are so few airline accidents these days, being an aviation disaster lawyer must be a pretty boring job. Airlines carry liability insurance on their aircraft, so the actual financial damage it does to the company is small. It might save them some money if they could get away with carrying less insurance, but it would still be expensive to cover terrorist acts and liability for damage and injuries on the ground.


User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 691 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4927 times:

The way it works under US law is that code share parteners are generally liable for the actions of their partners. When passengers booked these flights, it was under the AMR umbrella, so to speak. AMR benefits from putting their logo on their partner's aircraft and getting the revenue that results from the increased market share of the code share. This is the downside of that.

When Thai lost an Airbus in Thailand, United was on the hook. When the Swiss MD11 went down Delta had some problems as some of their passengers were on it. This is also why code share partners do safety audits of their partners as well. To ensure that their operations are safe. But when something happens, they normally are all on the hook for it. Airlines are also aware of this issue and they have insurance for these occasions.


User currently offlineJmy007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 598 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4856 times:

Correct me if I am wrong, But I thought airlines and the travel industry must tell the ticket holder who the flight is operated by, by law.

I know I certainly tell my clients if they are on code share or operated by flight.




Cookies are the Gateway pastry. They lead to Éclairs and Bear Claws.
User currently offlineMoMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4823 times:

Gotham:

Sure, if AA/CC/etc loses this lawsuit, insurance will pay. Then the insurance companies will charge everyone more for insurance to cover their losses. Just because the whole amount doesn't directly come from AA's pocket doesn't mean AA doesn't indirectly pay for it.

Moman



AA Platinum Member - American Airlines Forever
User currently offlineMilesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1995 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4792 times:

I am an attorney. I do not do personal injury cases, but something you all have missed here is the following:

The passenger who died, had a contract with American Airlines, or AMR, Inc., not with the commuter carrier operating the plane. Therefore, because of the privity between the dead person and American, American is the proper Defendant. There is reasonable belief that the other defendants may be liable as well, and it would be a waste of everyone's money to file separate lawsuits against the airframe manufacturer, the engine manufacturer, American, Corporate, and Trans States. I will admit that suing Trans States is a bit less of a sure thing, but one thing is for sure, one or more of the Defendants is liable to the Plaintiff, unless the Plaintiff somehow caused the aircraft to crash, ala Mohammed Atta, and that is not the case here. Everyone hates lawyers until they need one. And unfortunately, when someone dies in a plane crash, the carrier's insurance companies often make low ball offers to the victim's families. I hope none of you ever need to file a law suit as this person's family did, but if you or one of your loved ones, especially one who provides you with financial support is killed in a plane crash, you will need a lawyer. We all are not vultures.


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7525 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4616 times:


Has the NTSB determined the cause of the crash?.

This all seems somewhat premature.


25 Kellmark : Under US Law, the finding of probable cause by the NTSB is not allowed to be used in a civil court case. The plaintiff must prove the case independent
26 Pilotpip : Qqflyboy, Did the article mention if the suit was filed in Missouri or Federal court? The reason that I ask this because it will likely be dissmissed
27 Bennett123 : IMO this is still premature. Surely the CAUSE of the crash is relevant. My understanding is that the cause has yet to be determined.
28 2H4 : Everyone hates lawyers until they need one. Too often, though, people need lawyers simply to protect themselves from other lawyers. The irresponsible,
29 WeAreUnited : Regarding "Operated By" I have never had a res agent tell me that a flight was operated by a 3rd party.* It's a law. If you had a RES agent not tell
30 Elwood64151 : All good attorney will sue every possible plaintiff who has a lot of money Shouldn't that be "defendant?" Usually the plaintiff is the one who's filin
31 Kellmark : Good points by several of you. Yes, the attorney should sue every possible defendant, not plaintiff. These lawsuits are usually filed in state courts
32 Tekelberry : Too often, though, people need lawyers simply to protect themselves from other lawyers. The irresponsible, ambulance-chaser types propel a viscous cir
33 Bennett123 : IMHO it merely changes it to a situation where customers expect a guarantee that the sun will shine. Tort should be about negligance not bad luck. Onc
34 Ultrapig : Miles right is correct. I am an attorney. I don't do PI. But the same people who will rail about PI suits will call me three Weeks later for a referen
35 QQflyboy : It's far from unheard of for negligent ground handling (and I'm talking normal ground handling, not MX) to wind up causing a bird to come down RE: Val
36 Thunder9 : My biggest concern about this whole situation is this... Why, when an accident occurs, does most everyone feel entitled to sue for ungodly amounts of
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA Sued Over Lack Of Legroom In Economy Class posted Fri May 14 2004 16:56:59 by Spoon04
AA Sued Over HIV Tests For Applicants posted Mon Mar 7 2005 09:32:59 by 777ER
Airbus And AA In Nasty Fight Over Crash posted Sun Oct 24 2004 23:17:51 by Yqfca
Bombardier, GE Sued Over 2004 NW Crash posted Wed Jan 11 2006 00:22:59 by Premobrimo
Confusion Over An Air Crash In BOM posted Wed Jan 12 2005 09:27:47 by IndianFlyboy
Was There AA Crash In South America In 1995? posted Sun Feb 17 2002 16:36:01 by Arsenal@LHR
AA 587, First Airbus Crash In US? posted Tue Nov 13 2001 05:38:19 by Phlflyer
Ukrainian 737 Impounded In Greece Over Crash Case posted Mon Oct 9 2000 23:31:52 by Slawko
Perimeter Airlines Crash In Norway House... posted Thu Nov 9 2006 07:30:02 by Virgin747
TU-134 Crash In June 2006 At SIP (Simferopol) posted Sat Nov 4 2006 23:52:16 by MHG