EAA getting sued

francisco collazos

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 11, 2021
Messages
483
Display Name

Display name:
ciscovet
Did anyone read the last issue of Plane and Pilot where they talked about the EAA getting sued for what happened at Airventure? Looks like the wife and relative of the people in the helicopter that collided with a gyrocopter are suing the EAA basically for not following FAA protocols. Just wonder what people here think about that and how will it affect the Airventure going forward.
 
Did anyone read the last issue of Plane and Pilot where they talked about the EAA getting sued for what happened at Airventure? Looks like the wife and relative of the people in the helicopter that collided with a gyrocopter are suing the EAA basically for not following FAA protocols. Just wonder what people here think about that and how will it affect the Airventure going forward.
I don't know the particulars. But if EAA had written safety policies and didn't enforce them, that puts them in a tough position from a liability standpoint. That said, this is why they have insurance and I dont' see it impacting Airventure in a meaningful way going forward. Do you remember the warbird collision on the runway a couple of decades ago (maybe longer)? They got sued there too and the event obviously went forward...
 
I don't know the particulars. But if EAA had written safety policies and didn't enforce them, that puts them in a tough position from a liability standpoint. That said, this is why they have insurance and I dont' see it impacting Airventure in a meaningful way going forward. Do you remember the warbird collision on the runway a couple of decades ago (maybe longer)? They got sued there too and the event obviously went forward...
With the jury system in place, short of gross and obvious negligence, your liability is mostly function of how skilled are your and your opponent lawyers - a particularly gifted ********ter (aka lawyer), can always make a jury swaying case that a lot more could have been done to address whatever is the issue at hand.
It is basically an eternal struggle between layers vs insurance companies ….
 
Should not affect the show in the long run,will probably be mandates to update their safety procedures.
 
Should not affect the show in the long run,will probably be mandates to update their safety procedures.
I think their rules were documented. But they didn't enforce them when they saw one or more violations of those rules by the gyro pilot who (allegedly) caused the accident.
 
If we are discussing the 2023 incident:

The Probable Cause and Findings section at the top states:
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The failure of the gyroplane pilot to see and avoid the helicopter while maneuvering in the
traffic pattern. Contributing to the accident was the gyroplane pilot’s performance of a
prohibited maneuver in the traffic pattern.

The Factual Information section states:
On the morning of the accident, both pilots attended an Experimental Aircraft Association
(EAA) AirVenture Oshkosh Ultralight/Homebuilt fun fly zone (FFZ) daily rotorcraft briefing. A
witness, who attended multiple daily rotorcraft briefings, reported that the briefings contained
concerns from other pilots related to gyroplane operations. The gyroplane pilots were told by
event coordinators, in part, to stop performing 360° turns and spirals while in the traffic
pattern. In addition, coordinators repeated their daily request for pilots to communicate their
intentions in the traffic pattern.

Hard to see how EAA could be held liable when the gyroplane pilot was told to stop performing a prohibited maneuver.
 
Hard to see how EAA could be held liable when the gyroplane pilot was told to stop performing a prohibited maneuver.
If I was the opposing lawyer I would ask "What did you do to people who performed the prohibited maneuver?" Unless you put them in a penalty box (i.e. prohibited them from using the fly-by pattern) for some time - a day, a week, dunno what's appropriate, well...
 
If I were defending them I would say that EAA is not the FAA nor the police. They create guidelines not laws, and hope them to be followed for the benefit of all concerned. That is a contribution with coordination appreciated by all, but enforcement by defined and escalating procedure cannot reasonably be viewed as a legal responsibility. Expecting EAA to function as a police force is unreasonable.
 
Last edited:
Kinda like having neighborhood kids in the yard. Play right or go home ... :dunno:
 
You can't sue the FAA or the police easily. You can sue the EAA. The giro guys are probably judgement proof themselves (who are the real culprits).
 
I think their rules were documented. But they didn't enforce them when they saw one or more violations of those rules by the gyro pilot who (allegedly) caused the accident.
Assuming EAA observed the gyro pilot violating well documented rules, what is the penalty for any pilot who violates any rule, including the FARs, at AirVenture?

Like him or nor, Gryder has a taped interview documenting the FAA does not enforce regulation violations at AirVenture even when the violations are blatant and dangerous. This includes landing wrong direction on runway and runway incursions.
 
Assuming EAA observed the gyro pilot violating well documented rules, what is the penalty for any pilot who violates any rule, including the FARs, at AirVenture?

Like him or nor, Gryder has a taped interview documenting the FAA does not enforce regulation violations at AirVenture even when the violations are blatant and dangerous. This includes landing wrong direction on runway and runway incursions.
You seem to be swapping the E and the F Willy Nilly in your argument. The FAA doesn’t regulate therefore the EAA is responsible.
 
You seem to be swapping the E and the F Willy Nilly in your argument. The FAA doesn’t regulate therefore the EAA is responsible.
There are 2 components. The EAA can’t enforce any thing, only the FAA can. FAA current and past employees will be summoned to the case as witnesses and the testimony will sink EAA.

Either the EAA will settle this law suit or a jury will find in the plaintiffs favor. You will probably never know the settlement, but it will be a multimillion $ pay out.
 
EAA did make changes this year based on that crash. They made a nice approach area where no planes can park, and people aren't allowed to be in this area. They also set up a tower to enforce this. They have someone sitting in the tower and if you violate the rules, you get one warning, and the second time, you're grounded for the rest of the event.

From what I read, it was mostly gyros doing 360s in the pattern. They can't hover and didn't feel like they should have to go around. They were warned, they continued to do it, and no enforcement action was taken. I'm guessing there will be a settlement.
 
There are 2 components. The EAA can’t enforce any thing, only the FAA can. FAA current and past employees will be summoned to the case as witnesses and the testimony will sink EAA.

Either the EAA will settle this law suit or a jury will find in the plaintiffs favor. You will probably never know the settlement, but it will be a multimillion $ pay out.
Why? Please explain your reasoning.
 
Why? Please explain your reasoning.
Because I have been involved in lawsuits and know how the process works.

The plaintiff council will be able to show EAA’s procedures and lack of over oversight of their procedures negligently contributed to the deaths in this accident sufficient the EAA’s attorneys will settle this suit.

Some of the star witnesses in this case will be current and past FAA employees. If you care to search Gryder’s You Tube videos and find one that has an audio interview with an FAA employee at the event, it is rather damning.

It basically portrays an FAA and an EAA with an event that can be described as out of control at times with no actions taken against the pilots involved.
 
Yeah no doubt they would settle but of course i'm not a lawyer. I was more wondering if these accidents would lead to the end of airventure. Of course there is an accepted amount of hazardous activity going on at these events. When do they say enough is enough and shut the whole thing down?
 
Yeah no doubt they would settle but of course i'm not a lawyer. I was more wondering if these accidents would lead to the end of airventure. Of course there is an accepted amount of hazardous activity going on at these events. When do they say enough is enough and shut the whole thing down?
No amount of hazardous activity is acceptable and that’s is what is going to sink the EAA. In the past, it was acceptable and not addressed.

Do I believe this will be the end of the event? No, but I believe it will be the end of an accepted amount of hazardous activity.

In the near future, unsafe practices, busting a reg or violating the event NOTAM minimally is going to get you tossed from the event and you are likely to see the FAA end their hands off policy. You are also likely to see a warning statement, written very nicely of course, coming to future events.
 
Last edited:
This isn't the first time EAA has been sued. Laird Doctor sued the EAA and Howard Pardue (I think Doctor got $500,000 out of the EAA and nothing out of Pardue). They got sued when an occupied cub got blown into an adjacent tent. They got sued a few times over the Arlington Fly-In as well. Probably there are more as the Wisconsin state court records aren't well indexed.
 
Because I have been involved in lawsuits and know how the process works.
"I have been involved in X and therefore I am an authoritative expert on X" is as much a non sequitur as the Holiday Inn Express ads, even if X were limited to a specific type of lawsuit as opposed to the universe of all lawsuits. Your discussion of this topic appears to lie squarely on the early peak of the Dunning-Kruger curve.

Does anyone here have a copy of the pleadings in the lawsuit referred to in this thread?
 
"I have been involved in X and therefore I am an authoritative expert on X" is as much a non sequitur as the Holiday Inn Express ads, even if X were limited to a specific type of lawsuit as opposed to the universe of all lawsuits. Your discussion of this topic appears to lie squarely on the early peak of the Dunning-Kruger curve.

Does anyone here have a copy of the pleadings in the lawsuit referred to in this thread?
Or maybe I worked with multiple events each year with attendance as much as 150k in a day and know what I am talking about.
 
Or maybe I worked with multiple events each year with attendance as much as 150k in a day and know what I am talking about.
That’s another non sequitur. Even if you personally ran every such event all on your lonesome, got sued every time for the people who died at all your events, and personally led the legal team that defended you from those lawsuits, it still wouldn’t necessarily follow that you know what you are talking about. But it might be relevant. Do you care to share some of the particulars of the major-event wrongful death lawsuits you have been involved in that you believe show your expertise to make predictions of this one?
 
That’s another non sequitur. Even if you personally ran every such event all on your lonesome, got sued every time for the people who died at all your events, and personally led the legal team that defended you from those lawsuits, it still wouldn’t necessarily follow that you know what you are talking about. But it might be relevant. Do you care to share some of the particulars of the major-event wrongful death lawsuits you have been involved in that you believe show your expertise to make predictions of this one?
Do you want to add anything useful or not?
 
You think cliffs input has been in any way useful? Lol
Speculation and a discussion on the matter is why I posted here not speculation on someone's law degree or lack of one. So yes it's been useful instead of the "you don't know what you are talking about because you are not a lawyer" which seems to happen a lot. Nothing wrong with getting peoples opinions and I think I do understand the limitations of said opinions.
 
Speculation and a discussion on the matter is why I posted here not speculation on someone's law degree or lack of one. So yes it's been useful instead of the "you don't know what you are talking about because you are not a lawyer" which seems to happen a lot. Nothing wrong with getting peoples opinions and I think I do understand the limitations of said opinions.
Ok. His comments do fit the baseless speculation category, so I guess you’re right.
 
Do you want to add anything useful or not?
I asked if anyone has a copy of the pleadings in the lawsuit you posted about. I think those would be rather useful in the discussion. I also generally think it's useful for people involved in a discussion to know the basis of opinions presented as authoritative in that discussion.

Speculation and a discussion on the matter is why I posted here not speculation on someone's law degree or lack of one. So yes it's been useful instead of the "you don't know what you are talking about because you are not a lawyer" which seems to happen a lot. Nothing wrong with getting peoples opinions and I think I do understand the limitations of said opinions.
I don't recall saying that anyone doesn't know what he's talking about or that a person being or not being a lawyer has anything to do with it. I think that, if any user here has been involved in a large-event wrongful death lawsuit in a meaningful capacity, he has more relevant experience with the issue than 99% of practicing attorneys do, although his perspective may be limited by the sample size and nature of that case.
 
Back
Top