Lawsuit Madness - OMG

Status
Not open for further replies.
As someone with some working knowledge of the legal system and various lawsuits that have garnered media attention, I used to think that the press always got it wrong because they simply weren't educated and they didn't bother to learn anything about the subject on which they were reporting. But I see now that the problem is much deeper.
 
Mr Bernath:

I want to thank you for this thread and your website, it provides great comic relief. Plus, next time I decide to take off with one tank dry and ~30 minutes of fuel in the other tank I won't because you have shared your wisdom**.

*Real reason- I have common sense, and don't ever even come close to violating the required fuel FAR's, but thanks anyway.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
if the airport was only 6 miles away. Why didn't you call a cab? freakin weekend warriors. He gets in a lsa and think he is iceman. I wonder if he broadcasted BINGO over the radio.
 
cirrusmx said:
if the airport was only 6 miles away. Why didn't you call a cab? freakin weekend warriors. He gets in a lsa and think he is iceman. I wonder if he broadcasted BINGO over the radio.
Click to expand...

He's only "Bingo" in the brains department. . . :yes:
 
upstateny said:
What is the reason for the "I love me" post #437? Do you think showing us that you like to play dress up helps your case?
Click to expand...

It takes a healthy dose of narcicism to post that kind of photo spread of oneself online.
 
Have you talked to the NTSB yet...you know, the people responsible for investigating such defects?NTSB is fully aware of this lawsuit of Flight Design ordered to warn british pilots of the design defect but choosing as a business decision to not warning USA pilots.

Pictures: You're putting wrong pictures of me up. Here's the real me. And what have you done in your lifetime?
feldon1.gif


When you discuss this Flight Design defect but do not address the facts then you are doing nobody any service.

When you call me "poopy-head" or its equivalent, then you are showing that a. you arn't discussing the facts and b. you've lost all abilities to reason/argue. He's only "Bingo" in the brains department.

like to play dress up I've earned the right to wear every suit. Attended Oxford, passed the Solicitors Exam for the Solicitors Regulatory Agency. Chief Petty Office and 2nd Class Petty Officer. Praised and decorated by aircraft carrier Captains, newscaster/newsdirector on the 2nd biggest radio station in the world, sucessful lawyer who has saved the life of hundreds of people, actor in Grimm and Portlandia, dog rescuing with my piloting.

...and you?

But in any case, if you post a picture that is not me, then I've given you a variety to post OF me.

Again, this has been very successful in getting the word out about Flight Design's callous indifference to the safety of USA pilots. and it has beern amusing to see the lunatic fringe attempt to take the discussion down to the middle school playground level. That didn't succeed and the word is out and I have saved someone's life.
 
Last edited:
danielabernath said:
Have you talked to the NTSB yet...you know, the people responsible for investigating such defects?NTSB is fully aware of this lawsuit of Flight Design ordered to warn british pilots of the design defect but choosing as a business decision to not warning USA pilots.
Click to expand...

So, that's a "No" then? You've not reported your accident to the NTSB as required by the regulations?
 
danielabernath said:
I am in full compliance with every law, rule and/or regulation.
Click to expand...

Let's expand on that.

Are you specifically in compliance with 49 CFR 830.15? Have you filed the 6120.1 with the NTSB?

Were you in compliance with 14 CFR 91.151 when you departed prior to your accident?

If the answer to the immediately above question is "Yes", then why did you lie to local LEOs after the accident?
 
Last edited:
danielabernath said:
Again, this has been very successful in getting the word out about Flight Design's callous indifference to the safety of USA pilots. and it has beern amusing to see the lunatic fringe attempt to take the discussion down to the middle school playground level. That didn't succeed and the word is out and I have saved someone's life.
Click to expand...

The "lunatic fringe" is pretty much every single person here. We're ALL telling you that YOU screwed up, NOT Flight Design.

You have helped it to the "middle school level" yourself by completely ignoring the simple facts of your own case - That you made a stupid mistake and you won't own up to it.
 
Just for a contrast. An acquaintance of mine who is an aviation attorney bent his plane in a fuel-starvation incident that was caused by a combination of a quirky fuel system and his own actions. After he had talked to the FAA, he posted on beechtalk about the mishap and pointed out how his actions combined with the planes fuel system caused the incident. I, and many other operators of aircraft with similar fuel systems, took this as a reminder to not do what he did.

If the OP wanted to warn other pilots, posting his experience about it here, on the AOPA board and other type boards would do the most good. Also, the AOPA journal has a 'I learned about flying from that' column where they print pilots recounts of their screw-ups.

No lawsuit necessary.
 
weilke said:
Just for a contrast. An acquaintance of mine who is an aviation attorney bent his plane in a fuel-starvation incident that was caused by a combination of a quirky fuel system and his own actions. After he had talked to the FAA, he posted on beechtalk about the mishap and pointed out how his actions combined with the planes fuel system caused the incident. I, and many other operators of aircraft with similar fuel systems, took this as a reminder to not do what he did.

If the OP wanted to warn other pilots, posting his experience about it here, on the AOPA board and other type boards would do the most good. Also, the AOPA journal has a 'I learned about flying from that' column where they print pilots recounts of their screw-ups.

No lawsuit necessary.
Click to expand...

True, no lawsuit necessary. However, the capability of admitting that perhaps you committed an error yourself is required for such actions, something our "lawyer" friend doesn't seem to possess.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
The "lunatic fringe" is pretty much every single person here. We're ALL telling you that YOU screwed up, NOT Flight Design.

You have helped it to the "middle school level" yourself by completely ignoring the simple facts of your own case - That you made a stupid mistake and you won't own up to it.
Click to expand...

My guess is you'd have better luck explaining string theory to a cockroach.
 
The "lunatic fringe" is pretty much every single person here.
As over 1,000 people have read the complaint, every word of it and about 4 people are calling me poo poo head, that would make the lunitic frindge at less than one half of one per cent.
I really don't understand why grown men would take the time to call me poo poo head and ignore the substance of my warning of Flight Design's deadly defect plus intentional hiding of the deadly defect from American pilots. I did my duty. I'll continue to do my duty and silly little attacks that are based on personal statements and on fictions have no impact on the proceedings. www.aspecialdayguide.com/bernathresume.htm
 
So, I'll take that as a "No, I'm not in compliance with 49 CFR 830 and was not in compliance with 14 CFR 91.151"
 
danielabernath said:
The "lunatic fringe" is pretty much every single person here.
As over 1,000 people have read the complaint, every word of it and about 4 people are calling me poo poo head, that would make the lunitic frindge at less than one half of one per cent.
I really don't understand why grown men would take the time to call me poo poo head and ignore the substance of my warning of Flight Design's deadly defect plus intentional hiding of the deadly defect from American pilots. I did my duty. I'll continue to do my duty and silly little attacks that are based on personal statements and on fictions have no impact on the proceedings. www.aspecialdayguide.com/bernathresume.htm
Click to expand...

Two questions, can you answer them?

1. Either you lied to the LEO.
2. Or the LEO lied about you.
3. Or you were both truthful and you took off illegally.

Which is it 1,2 or 3?

Have you filed the 6120.1 with the NTSB?

Yes/No?
 
Just for a contrast. An acquaintance of mine who is an aviation attorney bent his plane in a fuel-starvation incident that was caused by a combination of a quirky fuel system and his own actions. After he had talked to the FAA, he posted on beechtalk about the mishap and pointed out how his actions combined with the planes fuel system caused the incident. I, and many other operators of aircraft with similar fuel systems, took this as a reminder to not do what he did.


If the OP wanted to warn other pilots, posting his experience about it here, on the AOPA board and other type boards would do the most good. Also, the AOPA journal has a 'I learned about flying from that' column where they print pilots recounts of their screw-ups.

No lawsuit necessary.
weilke is online now Report Post Unfortunately, a lawsuit is necessary to get Flight Designs attention and get them to post the warning on all CTSW's. They were ordered to do so by a government agency and ignored their moral obligation to do so in American CTSWs. Their whole attitude is that they did nothing wrong even though the evidence shows their callous indifference to American lives. Thats the whole difference here. FD says FU even though it is proved beyond any doubt that their design defect was known to them, they refused to warn CTSW pilots or instruct CTSW pilots. If you would read the reason for the "assault on the citadel" whereby strict liability in tort is now the law, you will see that the burden to fix, warn and instruct is on Flight Design and they failed to and refused their obligation to American pilots. Simple.
 
danielabernath said:
Unfortunately, a lawsuit is necessary to get Flight Designs attention and get them to post the warning on all CTSW's. They were ordered to do so by a government agency and ignored their moral obligation to do so in American CTSWs.
Click to expand...

Yet, you've failed to report this accident to the US Government Agency that can order them to do so...the NTSB.
 
Two questions, can you answer them?

1. Either you lied to the LEO.
2. Or the LEO lied about you.
3. Or you were both truthful and you took off illegally.

Which is it 1,2 or 3?

Have you filed the 6120.1 with the NTSB?

Yes/No?

No. I lied to no body and I am in full compliance with all rules, laws and regulations.
 
danielabernath said:
Two questions, can you answer them?

1. Either you lied to the LEO.
2. Or the LEO lied about you.
3. Or you were both truthful and you took off illegally.

Which is it 1,2 or 3?

Have you filed the 6120.1 with the NTSB?

Yes/No?

No. I lied to no body and I am in full compliance with all rules, laws and regulations.
Click to expand...

Explain how you took off with 30 minutes of fuel, and were in compliance with 91.151 then.
 
danielabernath said:
The "lunatic fringe" is pretty much every single person here.
As over 1,000 people have read the complaint, every word of it and about 4 people are calling me poo poo head, that would make the lunitic frindge at less than one half of one per cent.
I really don't understand why grown men would take the time to call me poo poo head and ignore the substance of my warning of Flight Design's deadly defect plus intentional hiding of the deadly defect from American pilots. I did my duty. I'll continue to do my duty and silly little attacks that are based on personal statements and on fictions have no impact on the proceedings. www.aspecialdayguide.com/bernathresume.htm
Click to expand...

I really did not see the need to be redundant but if you insist, then yes your actions in this matter have earned you the title of Poo Poo Head. You violated several FARs and in general acted the fool. Taking off with one empty tank and a total fuel on board of less then 10% capacity is not a way to continue to fly. Requiring a placard that says don't do stupid things in this plane is a meaningless requirement.
 
jtheune said:
I really did not see the need to be redundant but if you insist, then yes your actions in this matter have earned you the title of Poo Poo Head. You violated several FARs and in general acted the fool. Taking off with one empty tank and a total fuel on board of less then 10% capacity is not a way to continue to fly. Requiring a placard that says don't do stupid things in this plane is a meaningless requirement.
Click to expand...

Why don't we all take up a collection to get a placard that reads "Don't let me fly" and put a string on it, then we can send it to our "lawyer" friend and have him wear it about his neck, as a warning to anyone who might rent or sell a plane to him?
 
danielabernath said:
I really don't understand why grown men would take the time to call me poo poo head and ignore the substance of my warning of Flight Design's deadly defect plus intentional hiding of the deadly defect from American pilots.
Click to expand...

I don't think I have called you anything but a bad lawyer and poor pilot. There is no 'deadly defect', what happenend to you was the expected outcome of taking off with an empty tank in a interconnected tank system. You did not understand how your plane works and wrecked it as a result. Your case should be a warning to light sport instructors who also deal in aircraft that there are simply sales that are not worth the risk.
 
We're the fuel tanks examined after the landing? How much fuel remained in the tank?

What evidence do you have that there was any usable fuel remaining after the off field landing?
 
Views around the world of www.aspecialdayguide.com/bernathresume.htm
1. United States 10,656 88.50%
2. Nigeria 248 2.06%
3. United Kingdom 101 0.84%
4. Cote D'Ivoire 95 0.79%
5. Ghana 78 0.65%
6. Canada 77 0.64%
7. Germany 48 0.40%
8. Russian Federation 47 0.39%
9. Japan 45 0.37%
10. Australia 42 0.35%
11. Satellite Provider 41 0.34%
12. India 35 0.29%
13. Hungary 35 0.29%
14. France 30 0.25%
15. Senegal 29 0.24%
16. Italy 24 0.20%
17. South Africa 21 0.17%
18. China 19 0.16%
19. Netherlands 18 0.15%
20. Benin 18 0.15%
21. Hong Kong 16 0.13%
22. Spain 16 0.13%
23. Thailand 16 0.13%
24. Mexico 15 0.12%
25. Malaysia 14 0.12%
26. Poland 14 0.12%
27. Brazil 13 0.11%
28. United Arab Emirates 11 0.09%
29. Turkey 11 0.09%
30. Philippines 9 0.07%
31. Switzerland 9 0.07%
32. Korea, Republic of 9 0.07%
33. Indonesia 9 0.07%
34. Slovakia 8 0.07%
35. Belgium 8 0.07%
36. Greece 8 0.07%
37. Iran, Islamic Republic of 7 0.06%
38. Burkina Faso 7 0.06%
39. Romania 7 0.06%
40. Sweden 6 0.05%
41. Saudi Arabia 6 0.05%
42. Denmark 6 0.05%
43. Portugal 5 0.04%
44. Kenya 5 0.04%
45. Anonymous Proxy 5 0.04%
46. Bahrain 5 0.04%
47. Vietnam 5 0.04%
48. Colombia 4 0.03%
49. Israel 4 0.03%
50. Bangladesh 4 0.03%
51. Czech Republic 4 0.03%
52. Ireland 4 0.03%
53. Pakistan 4 0.03%
54. Croatia 4 0.03%
55. Finland 3 0.02%
56. Ukraine 3 0.02%
57. Puerto Rico 3 0.02%
58. Qatar 3 0.02%
59. Chile 3 0.02%
60. Egypt 2 0.02%
61. Togo 2 0.02%
62. Cambodia 2 0.02%
63. Iraq 2 0.02%
64. Peru 2 0.02%
65. Austria 2 0.02%
66. Singapore 2 0.02%
67. New Zealand 2 0.02%
68. Unknown 1 0.01%
69. Lebanon 1 0.01%
70. Uzbekistan 1 0.01%
71. Taiwan 1 0.01%
72. Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 0.01%
73. Argentina 1 0.01%
74. Palestinian Territory, Occupied 1 0.01%
75. Macedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of 1 0.01%
76. Fiji 1 0.01%
77. Luxembourg 1 0.01%
78. Paraguay 1 0.01%
79. Afghanistan 1 0.01%
80. Norway 1 0.01%
81. Europe 1 0.01%
82. Andorra 1 0.01%
83. Kuwait 1 0.01%
84. Gambia 1 0.01%
85. Bulgaria 1 0.01%
86. Jordan 1 0.01%
87. Dominica 1 0.01%
88. Bermuda 1 0.01%
89. Mozambique 1 0.01%
90. Bolivia 1 0.01%
91. Uruguay 1 0.01%
92. Slovenia 1 0.01%
 
I see Nigeria is #2. Maybe they're looking for new scams, you seem to be attempting to perfect this scam all right.
 
I have an aviation attorney who has flown for the US Marine Corps in Vietnam and has kept up his flying credentials for the next 40 years. As my legal counsel on this, I am fully in compliance with all rules, regulations and laws.
I can quote my lawyer (who is after all an expert on both aviation AND aviation law) and tell you that in his opinion there is a design defect, FD knew about it but did not warn American pilots, I was in full compliance with all the FARS, etc. that you continue to repeatedly ask and I answer.
The NTSB is investigating this and FD's acts and omissions and I have no control over what the NTSB says or does.
In a court of law this will all be carefully, slowly and thoughly laid out before a jury. FD has hired a local attorney and I am sure he will attempt to make all the same irrelevant arguments and as you have made them all here I am now fore armed for the silliness of but another defense paid attorney. Thanks for helping (even though you didn't mean to).
 
Good luck in your scam.

Oh, BTW, unlike the Social Security Disability Scam you normally run as a non-admitted attorney in Oregon, the other side gets to question your "facts", it's not a one-sided hearing.

Also recommend not assaulting the judge this time. They tend to not like that.
 
bartmc said:
Have you filed the 6120.1 with the NTSB?

Yes/No?
Click to expand...

49 CFR 830.15:
(b) Crewmember statement. Each crewmember, if physically able at the time the report is submitted, shall attach a statement setting forth the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to the accident or incident as they appear to him. If the crewmember is incapacitated, he shall submit the statement as soon as he is physically able.
Click to expand...
 
danielabernath said:
I have an aviation attorney who has flown for the US Marine Corps in Vietnam and has kept up his flying credentials for the next 40 years. As my legal counsel on this, I am fully in compliance with all rules, regulations and laws.
I can quote my lawyer (who is after all an expert on both aviation AND aviation law) and tell you that in his opinion there is a design defect, FD knew about it but did not warn American pilots, I was in full compliance with all the FARS, etc. that you continue to repeatedly ask and I answer.
The NTSB is investigating this and FD's acts and omissions and I have no control over what the NTSB says or does.
In a court of law this will all be carefully, slowly and thoughly laid out before a jury. FD has hired a local attorney and I am sure he will attempt to make all the same irrelevant arguments and as you have made them all here I am now fore armed for the silliness of but another defense paid attorney. Thanks for helping (even though you didn't mean to).
Click to expand...

You want us to believe there is a design defect, all well and good, yet you won't disclose how much fuel was in the tank after landing.

There are what appear to be fuel stains all over the wing, could that be from a loose fuel cap?
 
I have an alternative wording the the placard in the plane:

Operation prohibited by dumbasses
 
danielabernath said:
Unfortunately, a lawsuit is necessary to get Flight Designs attention and get them to post the warning on all CTSW's. They were ordered to do so by a government agency and ignored their moral obligation to do so in American CTSWs. Their whole attitude is that they did nothing wrong even though the evidence shows their callous indifference to American lives. Thats the whole difference here. FD says FU even though it is proved beyond any doubt that their design defect was known to them, they refused to warn CTSW pilots or instruct CTSW pilots. If you would read the reason for the "assault on the citadel" whereby strict liability in tort is now the law, you will see that the burden to fix, warn and instruct is on Flight Design and they failed to and refused their obligation to American pilots. Simple.
Click to expand...


Why don't you just spend $50 on placards and mail them to everybody that owns a CTSW in the US? Don't you have a moral obligation to save them?
 
danielabernath said:
I have an aviation attorney who has flown for the US Marine Corps in Vietnam and has kept up his flying credentials for the next 40 years. As my legal counsel on this, I am fully in compliance with all rules, regulations and laws..
Click to expand...

Why didn't you hire him to write a proper suit rather than the rambling disjointed piece you foamed onto a piece of paper ?

What is the defect you are alledging ? That a plane can"t fly without fuel in the tanks ?
 
I'm still trying to understand why the rest of us are still reading this thread and responding. He's been banned from two other aviation groups (LSA-specific) and looks like he's trying to get any level of sympathy here.

Wait - I forgot. It's the accident-on-the-side-of-the-road syndrome...we just can't resist slowing down and looking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top