Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
4 Pax Sue Boeing Over CO1404 Crash  
User currently offlineKBUF From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9597 times:

DENVER (AP) - Four passengers on a Continental Airlines jet that veered off a Denver runway on Dec. 20 have filed lawsuits against the jet's maker.

The lawsuits allege that Boeing Co. negligently designed and manufactured certain mechanisms on the plane, making it hard for the pilots to maintain runway heading while taking off.

The Houston-bound Boeing 737 veered sharply off the Denver International Airport runway and into a ravine, where it caught fire. The flight was carrying 115 people; 38 were injured.

The passengers who filed claims Wednesday in federal court in Denver were Julie Hart of Boulder County and Carey Scharfenstine of El Paso County. Scharfenstine also filed separate suits on behalf of her sons Greyson and Lloyd Scharfenstine.

Boeing did not immediately return a call seeking comment Wednesday night.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...x?feed=AP&date=20090225&id=9645023

Sigh... why am I not surprised...


"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."-Terry Pegula, February 22, 2011
35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9638 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9535 times:

Well all I can say is good luck to them against Boeing's Legal team and all the engineering resources that are at Boeing's disposal to prove whatever allegations are false. Boeing's got a pretty good history of defending its products. It is almost impossible that the lawyers defending these plaintiffs will be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Boeing was at fault, especially before the NTSB investigation has been publicized. I'd think that they'd have a better chance at going after Continental, but of course Boeing's got a lot more money to play with than Continental, so it is obvious who the lawyers will want to go after.


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineGrain From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 93 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9524 times:

someone hit my car with a ford the other day.... where are my lawyers at? ford is in for it

User currently offline0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 939 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9509 times:

Um, how many 737 flights are there in one day?!... No, better yet, one hour?!

Two words...

ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS

...End post.



"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3761 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9499 times:

Why is it that whenever some people find themselves in an accident of some kind the first thing they think of is: Can I make some money out of that?  Sad

At least only 4 of the pax filed suit. Could that mean that the frivolous-lawsuit-for-everything trend is decreasing?



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineFrmrCAPCADET From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9393 times:

Reasonable doubt is the criteria in criminal cases as I understand it. Civil cases have a lesset degree of proof.


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 79
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9336 times:



Quoting KBUF (Thread starter):
The lawsuits allege that Boeing Co. negligently designed and manufactured certain mechanisms on the plane, making it hard for the pilots to maintain runway heading while taking off.

Does anyone have the details of exactly what they're claiming was negligently designed/manufactured? If there really was some design flaw making it difficult to hold runway heading, why aren't more 737's running off the runway?

Quoting Francoflier (Reply 4):
Why is it that whenever some people find themselves in an accident of some kind the first thing they think of is: Can I make some money out of that?

Because, at least in the US, there are lawyers calling them up saying "you can make money out of this." And, thanks to contingency fee, the lawyers can also say "It won't cost you anything to try." The final cap is that, in the US, there's no limit on non-pecuniary damages.

Quoting FrmrCAPCADET (Reply 5):
Reasonable doubt is the criteria in criminal cases as I understand it. Civil cases have a lesset degree of proof.

True, but they also have to prove damaged. I'm very curious what damages they're going to try to claim that have any meaningful value.

Tom.


User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 38
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9304 times:

I would sue in a second and a half.

I hate America's litigious society, but I could probably extract First/BF Class tickets for life, which would rule.



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9296 times:

I think Boeing should file a counter suit for (insert reason here) and make an example out of these folks. It's time to get aggressive in how companies deal with this s**t.


I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9161 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 6):

Does anyone have the details of exactly what they're claiming was negligently designed/manufactured? If there really was some design flaw making it difficult to hold runway heading, why aren't more 737's running off the runway?

Because, as you no doubt know, all accidents require a certain set of circumstances to be in place, and in this case it happened while in others it didn't? Remember when TWA800 was lost and we had the dire warnings of all these time bombs flying around - you'd think with the problem affecting so many aircraft so much of the time that there'd be planes blowing up every other day.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 6):
Because, at least in the US, there are lawyers calling them up saying "you can make money out of this." And, thanks to contingency fee, the lawyers can also say "It won't cost you anything to try." The final cap is that, in the US, there's no limit on non-pecuniary damages.

Hmmm...

Without knowing any of the details, I'd say this case is for a settlement claim.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 6):

True, but they also have to prove damaged. I'm very curious what damages they're going to try to claim that have any meaningful value.

Loss of sexual performance/marital duties is one of the common claims. Quality of life, pain and suffering,emotional trauma, etc. etc. etc.

And no, they don't have to prove a thing. They merely have to have testimony (from the "victim" and a recognized authority - i.e. doctor) that a condition could exist. In the above example, pain is cited as causing discomfort, making intimacy difficult and distressful. A doctor merely has to provide evidence that the pain could exist. He'll have performed range of motion tests and asked questions - on a scale of 1 to 10 describe your pain bending over, walking, laying down, etc.

The burden then falls on the defendant to refute the claims based on their own experts. In the case of Boeing, their experts are extremely expensive, and trying to prove a person's pain is being overstated is usually very hard. That's why there are so many people able to get away with insurance/workman's comp fraud and why insurers often pay up initially and then hire P.I.'s after the fact, if they suspect something.


User currently offlineCX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6603 posts, RR: 55
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 9008 times:

Did they even come out with a conclusion as to what happened in that crash?

User currently offlineDragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8791 times:

You all just wait.... someone will file suit against Denver for building an airport that does not have runways that always line up with the wind.


Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineTraindoc From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8446 times:

The news report was on "Money Central." How appropriate!!

What if the crash landing/take off was due to forces beyond the control of either Boeing or Continental? Then the pax should be greatful to be alive and in one piece


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8404 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Francoflier (Reply 4):
Why is it that whenever some people find themselves in an accident of some kind the first thing they think of is: Can I make some money out of that?  Sad

The real problem is the lawyers who agree to take on the case, secure in the knowledge that while it will never reach a trial, much less a verdict, they will still be reimbursed by the court for all those legal fees they generate, even if the plantiffs see little to nothing.



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 8):
I think Boeing should file a counter suit for (insert reason here) and make an example out of these folks. It's time to get aggressive in how companies deal with this s**t.

Such action by Boeing would assuredly result in far more negative impressions in the media and the public. "What is Boeing trying to hide?" and "Big faceless, soulless company compounds misery they inflicted on victims" would be be but two of the headlines.

By keeping quiet and letting the truth playout, Boeing can show that the plantiffs and (especially) their legal team are just trying to make a fast, dishonest buck.


User currently offlineYellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8304 times:



Quoting Francoflier (Reply 4):
At least only 4 of the pax filed suit. Could that mean that the frivolous-lawsuit-for-everything trend is decreasing?

Well considering (according to another thread) that some of the US Hudson pax are suing too...I highly doubt it is changing.

In a country like mine...a judge would look at these plantiffs (especially the US one) and say "guys, you all are lucky to be alive...please thank your air crew, go home kiss your family, then go to church....and get out of my courtroom"



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3106 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8257 times:



Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 14):
Well considering (according to another thread) that some of the US Hudson pax are suing too...I highly doubt it is changing.

So are the US Airways passengers suing the Canadian govt for allowing "Canadian geese" to fly all the way to NY and get in the way of the plane.....? Big grin


User currently offlineGsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8133 times:

Agree with the inexcusable use of the judicial system to attempt to gain something. Without knowing the types of tickets involved, going after Boeing gets around the legal protections provided to CO.

Unfortunately now both CO's and Boeing's legal teams will have to pay attention to this which will only delay the ultimate judgment but will also increase the legal cost if not the actual settlement expense. Also at some point Co and Boeing will be come advisories in the process as Boeing will now have to go after CO saying their airplane and instructions on how to fly it were fine, and it was CO/pilot error that caused the accident.


User currently offlineBeertrucker From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7525 times:

And I bet you anything that all 4 of those people have the same Lawyer. I bet he is trying to get more to jump on board too.


Fly HI
User currently offlineBlueFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4000 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 1):
Well all I can say is good luck to them against Boeing's Legal team and all the engineering resources that are at Boeing's disposal to prove whatever allegations are false.

Boeing will not spend its vast, considerable legal and engineering resources to prove these allegations are false because this case will never see the inside of a court room and never be judged on its merits.

After a bit of back and forth by email and faxes, Boeing's lawyers will agree with the plaintiffs' sharks on a "settlement" that the plaintiffs will accept in exchange for renouncing their claims now and forever. Boeing's engineers will only tangentially be involved, and in the end Boeing will save money over going to trial.

All such lawsuits are based on the premise that it is cheaper for the defendant to settle out-of-court than to win in court.

In essence, as long as the plaintiffs have a case that has even the tiniest hint of being plausible, they have won the moment they filed their claim against Boeing...

Some companies choose to fight every single one of these lawsuits because they hope, in the end, that the enormous legal cost of these suits is offset by the number of potential plaintiffs/layers who choose not to sue them for fear of having to defend their case to the last court of appeal and not have a penny to show for it, but Boeing isn't one such company.

A friend of mine used to work for a company that even appealed a Not-Guilty verdict in the company's favor (I can't remember what legal ground they used to file the appeal), the intent being to basically bankrupt the lawyers and their client and scare all would-be frivolous plaintiffs away for years.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineASEFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7285 times:

When Ford was sued for designing the Pinto improperly (i.e. incinerating people in minor collisions) I assure you, the initial lawsuits alleged negligence w/o proof of design defects.

These people had a contract with the airline to fly them from point A to B, not only did Continental not fulfill the contract, but they also were sent hurtling off of the runway. It was someone's fault be it design defect, pilot error, ATC, God, etc. It's the court's job to decide.

Who knows, maybe boeing does have something to hide, maybe the pilots didn't follow proper procedures before takeoff, maybe ATC cleared them before they were supposed to. In any case, Boeing and Continental have the special-purpose wealth here, insurance. The judge/jury won't give these people ridiculous damages. Don't worry, despite the sensation surrounding torts cases in this country damages awarded are very reasonably calculated. Actually read the McD's hot coffee case (3RD degree burns and her damages were reduced to something almost nominal given the skin grafts and surgeries she had to undergo) instead of relying on the media (i.e. moneycentral).

How often do the members of this site criticize media reports of airline incidents. Here, you guys are reading it like it's scripture. Give it the same scutiny you might when a similar article on and airline accident.


User currently offlineASEFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7285 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
The real problem is the lawyers who agree to take on the case, secure in the knowledge that while it will never reach a trial, much less a verdict, they will still be reimbursed by the court for all those legal fees they generate, even if the plantiffs see little to nothing.

Courts don't pay attorney's fees, clients do.


User currently offlineAirproxx From France, joined Jun 2008, 636 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6513 times:



Quoting KBUF (Thread starter):
The passengers who filed claims Wednesday in federal court in Denver were Julie Hart of Boulder County and Carey Scharfenstine of El Paso County. Scharfenstine also filed separate suits on behalf of her sons Greyson and Lloyd Scharfenstine.



Quoting KBUF (Thread starter):
The lawsuits allege that Boeing Co. negligently designed and manufactured certain mechanisms on the plane, making it hard for the pilots to maintain runway heading while taking off.

Well to go further in such a case, they also should file a lawsuit against the runway designers, for lack of making it "self-frost-removable", against the wind, for lack of letting the two pilots enough control against itself, and finally they should file a lawsuit against God, for letting such a wind throw a plane off its runway heading and jeopardize its takeoff course...!  duck 



If you can meet with triumph and disaster, and treat those two impostors just the same
User currently offlineASEFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6176 times:



Quoting Airproxx (Reply 22):
"self-frost-removable", against the wind, for lack of letting the two pilots enough control against itself, and finally they should file a lawsuit against God, for letting such a wind throw a plane off its runway heading and jeopardize its takeoff course...

can't. God and the government are out. So no ATC either. Point is, we don't know what caused the accident, they don't know what caused the accident. You bring your case before the court, alleging something plausible, you go through discovery and fact-finding, you amend your case to reflect evidence gained during discovery, you present it to a jury of your peers and they settle dispute of facts between the parties, the law is applied to the facts found by the judge or jury and then a hearing is held to determine damages.


User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6157 times:



Quoting Airproxx (Reply 22):
Well to go further in such a case, they also should file a lawsuit against the runway designers, for lack of making it "self-frost-removable", against the wind, for lack of letting the two pilots enough control against itself, and finally they should file a lawsuit against God, for letting such a wind throw a plane off its runway heading and jeopardize its takeoff course...! duck

God has already been sued:

"Chambers lawsuit, which was filed on Friday in Douglas County Court, seeks a permanent injunction ordering God to cease certain harmful activities and the making of terroristic threats.

"The lawsuit admits God goes by all sorts of alias, names, titles and designations and it also recognizes the fact that the defendant is omnipresent.

"In the lawsuit, Chambers said he's tried to contact God numerous times."

http://www.ketv.com/news/14133442/detail.html

Followed by:

"OMAHA, Oct. 15 (UPI) -- A Nebraska lawmaker says he may appeal after an Omaha judge
tossed his suit against God because there was no evidence the defendant had been served papers."

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2008/10/...t_to_afterlife/UPI-21051224114340/

On a more serious note:

"(Vatican City, Rome) The devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina, America's most expensive natural disaster, has led to much finger pointing concerning who was to blame for the inadequate protection and disaster preparation. Now, add one more organization to the list of those accused of inaction.

"A consortium of concerned organizations and individuals, formed by a New Orleans attorney and calling itself 'People Against Natural DisastERs' (PANDER), has filed a class-action lawsuit against the Vatican. PANDER claims that insufficient and inadequate prayers to God for protection is partly to blame for the increasing number of people being killed, injured, and displaced by 'acts of God' "

http://www.ecoenquirer.com/acts-of-God-lawsuit.htm

I think the best thing to do is see what the actual suit is about. It is possible there is something to this - who knows?


User currently offlineASEFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5980 times:

But the courts in all those cases dismissed them. In any case, regardless of the ridiculousness of some of the claims that are brought before our courts, with what little information we know about the incident and their damages, we are in no position to write them off.

Judges are not rewarded by how many cases they let go to trial or the amount of the awards to parties. They are smart people who know how lawyers work (duh, as they are lawyers) and very rarely do they let things get out of control.

I would really like to hear from someone who has been in an aviation accident as a passenger, I don't think one can truly understand what type of claims these people might be bringing until he or she goes through that experience.


25 Upcfordcruiser : All sounds like normal business to me. I don't think I'd sue after surviving that ordeal, I'd be happy with a ticket home the next day and suitable re
26 Cubsrule : I'm not usually one to defend the plaintiffs' bar, but I will say this: in most states, such behavior would subject an attorney to discipline. Solici
27 Airproxx : lol I assume that an international, well... say a "universal" bench warrant against God has been launched as nobody saw him in front of the Court? I
28 Tdscanuck : The contract already specifies what compensation Continental will provide in the event that they fail to get from A to B...and those terms were agree
29 Post contains images DingDong : Well, I'd like to read the actual court filings through the PACER clearinghouse for U.S. federal courts. But I'm not having much luck so far in locati
30 Post contains images Brilondon : O.K. Now we have another law suite which has crossed into the realm of let make a buck any way that we can. I think that the respective state bar asso
31 Cubsrule : Federal pleadings don't have to be real specific... Given the current climate, I'd advise against publicly posting anything taken from PACER.
32 Airproxx : Well it appears that's it's actually too late, unfortunately :
33 Osiris30 : And once Boeing win they should then sue them into the ground! Sorry but sooner or later somone is going to have to stand up to this crap. Sad but tr
34 Khobar : Have you any idea how much it would cost Boeing to do that? And the chance of recovery would be...what exactly? And the end goal would be...what exac
35 Mymiles2go : I wouldn't at all compare this to the US Airways flight. This is different in many ways. Following the obvious breadcrumb trail here - folks are alleg
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...
BAA Sue Ryanair Over Unpaid Landing Fees At STN posted Tue Aug 5 2008 13:49:22 by Gilesdavies
CO To Be Tried Over Concorde Crash posted Thu Jul 3 2008 02:39:36 by Bakestar
French President Threatens To Sue Ryanair Over Ad posted Mon Jan 28 2008 18:27:50 by Viscount724
08/22 Boeing 737-809 Crash? posted Tue Oct 2 2007 11:17:32 by Joffie
AA To Sue Google Over Trademark Issue posted Sat Aug 18 2007 03:53:16 by Laxintl
Comair Sues FAA Over LEX Crash posted Fri Feb 23 2007 00:56:30 by Tys777
Pax Sue Emirates Kick Them Out For Medicine Rqst posted Sun Jan 14 2007 00:09:44 by Jimyvr
Family Files Lawsuit Over Comair Crash posted Fri Sep 1 2006 20:38:23 by DTW757
Survey: Pax Prefer 320s Over 737s Even In US posted Wed Sep 7 2005 03:40:02 by Anxebla
US Man Sought Over Concorde Crash (French Warrant) posted Wed Aug 31 2005 20:08:54 by Longhaulheavy