9th Circuit Court of Appeals At It Again

[JamesNahikian 0]

Now, I'm a pilot.
______________________________________________

For basis, on which date did you log your most-current flight hour? Thank you in advance for the courtesy of your reply.

D. James Nahikian
CHICAGO

[Kennedy 0]

Interesting story. Good to know (my interest in GA started with skydiving, and that's only a few years old)

I see the relevance, however I see significant differences.

Quote

Let's take a very similar law - GARA (General Aviation Revitalization Act.) It basically removed liability for defects in aircraft over a certain age (18 years.) This reduced insurance premiums enough to get manufacturers back making airplanes.

I'm not sure exactly what people were suing for. And that act seemed designed specifically because insurance was killing the industry.

You mentioned defects in older aircraft. Well, none of the lawsuits here are based on defects. They are based on a product that performed as designed. The lawsuits are not based in much of anything. Here, the bill is codifying precedent and accepted legal theory. In your example, the bill created a new exception to reduce liability insurance. In this case, there is no reduction in liability. The limits are being stated, but not lowered. We are not looking at an industry hurting because their older products are failing. We are not looking at rising cost form losing lawsuits. We are looking at an industry hurting solely from repetitive legal fees.

Quote

So like I said before, I'd be all for a law that helps prevent frivolous lawsuits against ALL aviation entities, from manufacturers to FBO's to pilots. A law that benefits just one of those entities didn't work in aviation.

In GA, how do you determine pilot error? What makes it so "easy" to prove?

Besides, the difference here is the injuries result from criminal action, not from operator error or equipment malfunction.

Do you believe lawsuits would shift from manufacturers and distributors to gunsmiths? From what I have seen, the lawsuits have one of two goals. (1) They want all guns gone, or (2) the gun maker has the deepest pockets involved. Generally, municipal and NAACP suits fall under number one, and the suits from individuals fall under number two. Category two would fall away as gunsmiths are generally either manufacturer shops, or very small businesses. I don't see category one going after small time locals.

Quote

Neither will a law that benefits only gun manufacturers. The gun manufacturers will love it of course, but pork for one industry does not a good law make.

Do you believe other industries will suffer from passage of the law, or other aspects of the firearms industry?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*