Risk management regarding passengers

Daleandee said:
Perhaps there is an exception to the rule. I know a number of folks that would not have let that one get by them.

I'm not a lawyer ... so I'll stop here before I get myself banned.
Click to expand...

I am not sure why you would be banned.

For what it's worth, I am a lawyer. Go back to my original post. Tort law is not the same in all 50 states. If someone tries to tell you otherwise, be very skeptical. You spend a lot of time in law school learning about the majority rule-- the rule in most states, and the minority rule, the rule followed in most of the rest of the states.
 
Clip4 said:
A liability waiver provides protection against negligence, it won’t provide protection against gross negligence. Gross negligence is severe breach of duty as to constitute recklessness, wanton endangerment of others, maliciousness, fraud or intent to harm.

A liability waiver won’t stop you from being sued. It is up to the court if the waiver is enforceable. The scuba industry is the king of liability waivers and they work reasonably well for that industry.
Click to expand...

While I acknowledge the distinction between negligence and gross negligence, gross negligence appears to be fairly subjective. It is likely that few if any pilots consider their actions grossly negligent, but a third-party observer may not agree. For various reasons, commercial operators (in scuba or aviation) are perhaps less likely to create such liabilities, even though they may be larger targets for claims.

With that said, I suspect that in most cases, the pockets of average individuals aren’t deep enough to warrant an effort beyond a quick insurance settlement.

There seems to be much hand-wringing over aviation liability, but I’m not sure that there are many ruinous claims against individuals with or without a liability waiver (at least when insured). I’d be interested to know if and how this perception is inaccurate.
 
The riskiest passenger:
A highly paid parent who has young dependents. Like an executive or surgeon with little kids. So you take that parent up, crash, and kill both of you. The surgeon’s estate loses big in the crash, by losing that parent’s future earnings, which is a big sum. So they will sue, for a lot more than your insurance will pay. Your estate is flattened.

A low-risk passenger:
Your family member. Somebody named in your will. Their estate won’t likely sue your estate.

Next-lowest risk:
A retired person with no dependents. With no survivor who lost a lot financially, there’s nobody who’s motivated to sue your estate.
 
NoHeat said:
The riskiest passenger:
A highly paid parent who has young dependents. Like an executive or surgeon with little kids. So you take that parent up, crash, and kill both of you. The surgeon’s estate loses big in the crash, by losing that parent’s future earnings, which is a big sum. So they will sue, for a lot more than your insurance will pay. Your estate is flattened.

A low-risk passenger:
Your family member. Somebody named in your will. Their estate won’t likely sue your estate.

Next-lowest risk:
A retired person with no dependents. With no survivor who lost a lot financially, there’s nobody who’s motivated to sue your estate.
Click to expand...

That makes sense, maybe also highest risk is a little kid because of all his future earnings to support his parents in their old age plus the emotional factor. Mark took our nanny’s son, about 3 at the time, for his first flight in an airplane. I’ll never forget the look on his mom’s face as she let us put him in the plane and while they were up there, a mix of trust and anxiety.

I know how she felt because it was the exact same thing I felt when I put my 12 year old daughter on a commercial flight to Scotland with a school group a few months after 9/11. It was extremely difficult to do that but life is all about balancing risk with benefit, and if you take no risk, what is life?

The little boy came back all happy and excited about his ride in the airplane, in the front seat no less! Would we do that now? Probably not. But even back then I wouldn’t have let Mark take that kid up if I didn’t also let him fly our own kids, and that was a very high bar. But you grow more risk averse in old(er) age. In fact there are a whole lot of risky things I’ve done when younger I wouldn’t now, but they gave me some of my best memories.
 
Rushie said:
But you grow more risk averse in old(er) age. In fact there are a whole lot of risky things I’ve done when younger I wouldn’t now, but they gave me some of my best memories.
Click to expand...


I’ve never understood that. The older we get, the less of our lives we’re putting at risk.
 
So I guess the safe solution is to divorce your wife. Leave all your assets to her in the settlement. Rent a room from her and fly with passengers...:rolleyes:
 
NoHeat said:
A low-risk passenger:
Your family member. Somebody named in your will. Their estate won’t likely sue your estate.
Click to expand...

They might even be precluded from suing. Here is a statute in my home state:

Sec. 1. (a) As used in this section, “child” or “stepchild” includes a child or stepchild of any age.



(b) The owner, operator, or person responsible for the operation of an aircraft is not liable for loss or damage arising from injuries to or the death of his:

(1) parent;

(2) spouse;

(3) child or stepchild;

(4) brother; or

(5) sister;​

resulting from the operation of the aircraft while the parent, spouse, child or stepchild, brother, or sister was being transported without payment therefor in the aircraft, unless the injuries or death are caused by the wanton or willful misconduct of the operator, owner, or person responsible for the operation of the aircraft.

Indiana Code 8-21-5-1. Liability; guests defined » LawServer

There might be similar statutes in other states.
 
Half Fast said:
I’ve never understood that. The older we get, the less of our lives we’re putting at risk.
Click to expand...

Yeah but if you are young, single, no kids, no or few assets, a lot less is going to be impacted by your demise.

As you get older, you start to accumulate more things that are depending on you. Granted if you die, I guess you would be the last person that has to worry about that.
 
midwestpa24 said:
As you get older, you start to accumulate more things that are depending on you.
Click to expand...

When I was eighteen I was indestructible. After a few at the bar I could get ten feet tall and bullet proof. The Good Lord and some age has a way of making one wiser (without the Bud). :)
 
PPC1052 said:
...Of course, you can also try to protect yourself from that by requiring the party executing the release indemnify you for the loss of consortium/support claims of their heirs.
Click to expand...
How does that work after the person signing the release dies? Does the obligation to indemnify pass to the heirs?
 
Palmpilot said:
How does that work after the person signing the release dies? Does the obligation to indemnify pass to the heirs?
Click to expand...

It passes to the decedent’s estate. The heirs only get what’s left from the estate after the debt is paid. It’s certainly not perfect. But its one measure you can attempt.
 
I’m surprised many here can handle the risk of leaving their own homes :confused:
 
I do think many people put too much emphasis on protecting their "estates". It's not like anyone on here is going to leave someone Scotland for crying out loud. Or that the grand kids care about the family silverware collection. If you do have a mini-camelot going on, setup a trust for the kids, so that it won't be wiped out if you take a family friend along on a VFR into IFR flight off Long Island.

Dark humor aside, one risk I don't take is flying parents with young kids. It's just my own personal rule, that I don't take risks where I can't live with the possible negative consequences, or where I can't reasonably explain my actions. I'm not going to put myself in a spot where a mistake I make has any realistic possibility of taking a kid's parent away.
 
Here's a thought - just don't be a bonehead pilot and kill your passengers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top