Kobe Bryant crash lawsuit

[MooneyMitch]

Helicopter Company Files Lawsuit Against Controllers In Bryant Crash

Kate O'Connor

August 26, 2020

20

Island Express Helicopters has filed a lawsuit alleging that two air traffic controllers are responsible for the crash of a company Sikorsky S-76Bhelicopter that killed retired NBA star Kobe Bryant and eight others last January. The cross-complaint asserts that the accident was caused by “a series of erroneous acts and/or omissions” committed by the controllers, including a “… failure to properly communicate termination of radar flight following … incomplete position relief briefing, and … lack of knowledge of current weather conditions.” It further claims that a controller contributed to the crash by “monopolizing the Pilot’s attention during the critical phase of the flight by making multiple radio calls, requiring transponder ident, and requesting the Pilot to state where he was and what his intentions were.”

Island Express’ lawsuit (PDF) was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. The individuals listed in the filing are employed by the FAA as air traffic controllers at the Southern California Terminal Radar Approach Control Facility (TRACON). To date, four lawsuits related to the accident have been filed against Island Express, including one by Bryant’s widow, Vanessa, which alleges negligence by the pilot for flying in unsafe weather conditions.

As previously reported by AVweb, Island Express holds a Part 135 operating certificate for on-demand, VFR-only operations. A preliminary report (PDF) released by the NTSB last February stated that no evidence of mechanical failure had been found in the crash, which occurred on Jan. 26, 2020, in Calabasas, California. It further noted that visibility was poor in the area of the accident due to low clouds and mist. According to the report, the pilot had requested and received a special VFR clearance. The final NTSB accident report has not yet been issued.

[Davidv]

I wonder if Morgan & Morgan is handling the case.  Best of luck to them!

[MooneyMitch]

This is going to be very interesting!!!

[ArtVandelay]

Is that a lawsuit against the controllers themselves or the FAA? I thought government employees were protected against lawsuits?

[MooneyMitch]

Just now, ArtVandelay said:

Is that a lawsuit against the controllers themselves or the FAA? I thought government employees were protected against lawsuits?

Based on the article, which could be inaccurate, I believe the suit is filed against the controllers.

[ArtVandelay]

Based on the article, which could be inaccurate, I believe the suit is filed against the controllers.

I don’t know too many controllers who are rich....so where’s the money coming from? This is just to deflect the blame.

Glad the pilot wasn’t on MS, otherwise they file suit against all MS members for confusing him with LOP vs ROP and T&G discussions.

[Davidv]

Just now, ArtVandelay said:

I don’t know too many controllers who are rich....so where’s the money coming from? This is just to deflect the blame.

Glad the pilot wasn’t on MS, otherwise they file suit against all MS members for confusing him with LOP vs ROP and T&G discussions.

Ha exactly.  They apparently failed to give total priority and all of their attention to an aircraft on VFR flight following.  I think they should also go after the tower controller at KSNA who very negligently gave them their takeoff clearance knowing that the conditions near KVNY could worsen. 

[pirate]

He was VFR not IFR end of story............

[Bolter]

2 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

Is that a lawsuit against the controllers themselves or the FAA? I thought government employees were protected against lawsuits?

The Los Angeles Times reported, “Among other items, the filing seeks a declaration that the cross-defendants [the two controllers] are ‘obligated to defend and indemnify’ Island Express.” The lawsuit is demanding a jury trial.

What I read in this is that this suit against the personal controllers is to force the controllers to take blame, so Island Express is therefore not responsible in the suit against them.  IMHO, the going after the controllers is inappropriate blame-storming and desperate lawyer tactics.  They were professional and consistent with my personal experience, and should not have to go through this additional personal burden after already inevitably feeling badly about a loss on their watch.  

https://www.flyingmag.com/story/news/bryant-helicopter-operator-sues-faa-atc/?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=email&tp=i-1NGB-Et-QU2-15wJYP-1c-6rGO-1c-15wV9y-l51wOjMhF7-14qUDO

PP Only.  Not a lawyer.  

[Lionudakis]

I agree with Bolter, this seems as a diversion tactic to shift the blame.  He screwed up, end of story. The pilot is ultimately responsible for the flight no matter what,   but when he crashes now its someone else fault ?  

[N201MKTurbo]

4 minutes ago, Lionudakis said:

I agree with Bolter, this seems as a diversion tactic to shift the blame.  He screwed up, end of story. The pilot is ultimately responsible for the flight no matter what,   but when he crashes now its someone else fault ?  

You are confusing regulations with what you can convince a jury of.

[Niko182]

3 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

failure to properly communicate termination of radar flight following...incomplete position relief briefing, ... It further claims that a controller contributed to the crash by “monopolizing the Pilot’s attention during the critical phase of the flight by making multiple radio calls, requiring transponder ident, and requesting the Pilot to state where he was and what his intentions were.”

This seems somewhat ironic. unable to give position reports... while ATC is asking them to ident, and they aren't complying.

This is CFIT, while VFR. I don't see how the controllers are to blame.

[Lionudakis]

2 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

You are confusing regulations with what you can convince a jury of.

You are correct     I suspect a good lawyer will have a jury convinced the controllers are cold blooded murderers

[MooneyMitch]

31 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

You are confusing regulations with what you can convince a jury of.

In a court room, it’s not always about justice........ it’s about the process. 

[MooneyMitch]

You do know why sharks never attack lawyers........ professional courtesy. 

Seriously though, I know a couple of GREAT ones......lawyers I mean, not sharks! 

[Mike A]

7 hours ago, Davidv said:

I wonder if Morgan & Morgan is handling the case.  Best of luck to them!

Haha.  I actually got a flier in the mail today from them asking if my plane was damaged in the Nashville tornado earlier this year and telling me they'd fight the insurance company on my behalf.

 

[Hank]

22 minutes ago, Mike A said:

Haha.  I actually got a flier in the mail today from them asking if my plane was damaged in the Nashville tornado earlier this year and telling me they'd fight the insurance company on my behalf.

 

For a smakl share of the proceeds. Lawyers used to take a third, now many of them take half . . . . "Sharks" is an insult to a majestic sea animal!

[Hank]

4 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

In a court room, it’s not always about justice........ it’s about the process. 

Exactly what is wrong with our legal system. Many (most?) lawyers only care about winning, because a strong Won-Loss record will "justify" higher fees, which is always their chief concern.

Then they have the audacity to call it the "justice system."  

Anyway, ain't no way this is the controllers' fault. The judge shiuld give a cursory glance at the FARs and toss the suit. 

[Flash]

12 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

Is that a lawsuit against the controllers themselves or the FAA? I thought government employees were protected against lawsuits?

They generally are protected against this kind of lawsuit, but that's probably not the whole story here. Caveat to what follows: this is not an area of law in which I have practiced. ( Shout out to @Carusoam , with respect to this post, I am a private pilot only.)  

Specifically, federal law generally protects federal employees from tort claims for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death arising or resulting from a negligent act or omission while the employees are acting within the scope of their employment. The story here could be that if the company can establish to any extent that an act or omission of a controller contributed to the crash (not that it was the cause or the main cause of the crash, just that it was a cause of the crash, to whatever extent), this could reduce the company's potential liability for damages arising from the crash (whether or not the plaintiffs can collect from the controllers or the FAA).

@Dave Piehler  should feel free to correct me. This is more his area of expertise.

[larrynimmo]

What if the “FAA controllers” were contract  controllers and not government employees?

[Jerry 5TJ]

I heard that Inland Express is also going to sue the FAA for failing to revoke their charter certificate, claiming “the FAA is at fault as it failed to investigate our improper and illegal operations and shut us down before we killed all those people.”  

[Dave Piehler]

I could go down the rabbit hole with this on a long, pedantic discourse on civil procedure, the doctrine of sovereign immunity and common law in addition to the Federal Tort Claims Act, but let's avoid that.  Instead, a few comments:

1.  Procedural posture:  This is styled a cross-complaint, but It really looks like what I'd call a a third-party complaint, because it brings in new parties (the controllers).  So yes, it is an attempt to deflect blame to the controllers.  This is a common tactic when pilots (or any other defendants) screw up.  Find someone else to fob it off on.  The more the merrier.

2.  The controllers will not have individual liability.  The federal gov't is ultimately liable.  I'm not an expert on the limits of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but I''ll bet if I dug around I'd find a dollar limit on liability, too.  Here in WI it's a measly $50,000 per claim for the state and municipalities, unless it's a motor vehicle accident, where it's upped to $250,000.

3.  Note the relief sought.  Apparently California is different from my jurisdiction, if there's a common law doctrine of "Total Equitable Indemnity."  Indemnity is a doctrine that requires someone to completely take over another's liability.  It seems out of place here to me.  It's usually a creature of a contractual agreement.  The other claims for contribution make more sense.  Those claim the controllers share fault with the pilot and should pay a proportionate amount of any award.

4.  Considering the stakes and likely damages, the helicopter company is going bankrupt if they lose this case.  There can't be an insurance policy large enough to pay all the damages.  So this would be rightly viewed as a bet-the-company desperation measure.

5.  Yes, juries do stupid things.  Remember the Carnahan crash in 2000 and the $4M jury verdict against Parker-Hannafin because a vacuum pump died and an AI went Tango Uniform?  That problem is exacerbated by judges letting juries hear junk science and letting emotional appeals about damages bleed into the liability determination.  The Daubert and Kumho Tire doctrine about experts is fine in theory, but in practice it often get ignored by judges and ipse dixit nonsense is allowed to be spouted to the jury.  And bifurcated trials separating the determination of liability from the determination of damages are frowned on as inefficient.

6.  Can we please avoid cheap shots at lawyers?  There are good eggs and bad eggs in every occupation and profession.  And lawyers wouldn't get away with the nonsense about which people often complain if courts would smack those silly claims down hard like they should.  They do it because the systems lets them, and it works.  (See item 5, supra.)

7.  Look at para. 11 of the pleading Flash linked -- the helicopter went from 1,500' AGL to 2,300' AGL in 8 seconds.  That's 6,000 fpm.  I gotta get me some of that!!

Dave Piehler

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by Dave Piehler
Correction of typographical error

[Ron McBride]

I was a defendant in a real estate case in CA.  My Insurance company was on the hook for up to $1,000,000.00.  As the case went on, I felt that the Attorneys were only defending the Insurance company.  I hired a separate Attorney that watches Insurance companies and there Attorneys. I learned a lot.  It is a scary screwed up system.  Eventually the case was settled.

Ron 

[GeeBee]

To propound on Dave Pehler's post, all union contracts have indemnification in them for the individual employees, including Air Traffic Controllers. Airline pilots are the same. I once had a nuisance suit brought against me by a lady who said she suffered abdominal pain because of hard braking at KRIC. The company defended me, of course but it all went away when the FOQA data showed I used autobrakes which have a predetermined deceleration rate. The plaintiff's attorney pooped a brick because he waited to file the suit after he thought the FDR data was gone, but was not aware the company keeps the FOQA data forever.

 

 

[toto]

Setting aside the legal issues here, and assuming all of the asserted facts to be true, it does highlight a potential VFR safety scenario .. 

The first controller asks the pilot to squawk VFR, but never terminates radar service, and then goes off shift.  The new controller comes on shift, and doesn't have a card for the a/c because the first controller thought he had terminated flight following.  The pilot, meanwhile, is under heavy workload and thinks that he still has flight following with radar service.  So there's a period of confusion where the new controller is trying to identify the a/c while the pilot is overloaded, and shortly after that an accident occurs.

The cautionary tale for the SE piston crowd is dealing with distractions..  Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.  

P.S.  I have zero rotary hours, and I have no idea how that all works.  But I imagine that a multi-engine turbine helicopter would have a magic "hover" button on the AP that could keep you out of trouble while you get your bearings.  Does that sort of thing actually exist?