mongo

My Feedback: (15)

any of you cali folks got any more info on this one?
suposedly happened at whittier narrows.
Armstead v. Academy of Model
Aeronautics, Alameda County Superior Court No. H-150430-1 settled before Hon. Daniel Weinstein, retired
judge of the Superior Court,

was the victim a participant or a spectator?

sswagerty

My Feedback: (53)

Source:

http://www.alexanderlaw.com/personal-injury.html



$1,350,000 recovery in a defective product case where a model airplane caused a leg fracture. Plaintiff, a 48 year old United Airlines pilot when he was struck by a high speed model airplane being clocked for speed at a sanctioned competition of the Academy of Model Aeronautics at Whittier Narrows. The crash of the model airplane and the injuries to plaintiff were caused by faulty construction, faulty pre-flight inspection, and the failure to conduct such races in protected fenced arenas. In addition, the standard AMA pre-flight pull test is believed to have caused the failure of fuselage bolts which caused the plane to fly out of control at a speed of 184 m.p.h. Because he was a co-participant in the racing competition and had started the doomed aircraft, the Academy claimed the plaintiff assumed the risk of this injury, although this was the first known case of such an injury occurring. Assumption of risk is a complete defense in recreational activities under recent decisions of California courts. Because of a non-union of the tibia and fibula, eleven medical procedures were required at a cost of $220,000. Fortunately plaintiff returned to return to work as a pilot. Armstead v. Academy of Model Aeronautics, Alameda County Superior Court No. H-150430-1 settled before Hon. Daniel Weinstein, retired judge of the Superior Court, Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

interesting reading. thank you for finding it. wonder how this one stacks up with the trip and fall claims?

hanna

My Feedback: (3)

Need more info- Was the person hit the owner of the airplane? Sometimes in c/l speed the person pitting the plane is the owner not the pilot. Mike K.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

more info would be very good. but if the AMA follows true to form, it will not be forthcomming, from them anyway.
reason i asked for input from the cali guys, maby some of them are familiar with this incedent.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Wow.

*Crash*Johnson*

My Feedback: (7)

Wow is right. Guess who is paying that bill

Jim C.

hahahha all you guys and gals in the ama!!! can you say... rate increase boys and girls... lets say it together... raaatttee iiinnncccreeaassee.. very good!!! thats why i would rather fly in my uncle's farm!!

abel_pranger

Okay, here's my guess: The AMA's SIR pays the first $250K, not a lot more than the guy's medical expenses. The insurance company pays the rest.

Abel

Borzak

My Feedback: (2)

\
And when insurance premiums go up WE pay the rate increase.

sideshow

My Feedback: (11)

Does your uncle have a website you could post to as well?


The thing I don't get is that the guy is a fellow modeler. I know there some bad apples in every bunch.....but geez. I guess he couldn't resist 1.3 dangled in front of him. Maybe he'll buy his local club a new field with the cash...not that anyone would want to fly there.

TheEdge

My Feedback: (788)

I am not a fan of suing anyone but for the same matter I do not like insurance companies but,,

We pay the insurance part of our dues to the AMA in the event of such cases.
That could have been anyone of us, maybe one of our kids and it would only be right that we get fair compensation.

How much is fair ? I don't know that is for a Judge to decide

abel_pranger

Have you mugged a lawyer today?

Live Wire

The bad part is it is our home ouners ins. AMA is second!!!!!!!!

TheEdge

My Feedback: (788)

Doesn't this go with the territory? No matter who, when and maybe where ?

Borzak

My Feedback: (2)

The phrase "inherent risk" has lost meaning in the US today unfortunatly.

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

This is what gets me, if the guy was involved in the event, how can he sue? I guess the practice is to sue first and ask questions later!

scottrc

Couple of things I do not understand. Can the builder now be accountable for damages? This was a defective product case yet it was the builder that was liable?

Yet, since the builder may have been the plaintiff, or involved in actions with the plaintiff, the plaintiff goes after the AMA for having a procedure that may have caused structural failure.

So, it wasn't the product, or the builder that caused the accident, but an AMA pre-flight safety procedure?

Does this mean that following rules, procedures, and even the safety code could result in more lawsuits?

sswagerty

My Feedback: (53)

scottrc

I think you have made a very valid point here. If following the recommended procedure caused the accident... what is next?

hanna

My Feedback: (3)

I do not have a copy of the current rules, but I thought all c/l speed events were flown inside a fence per the rulebook. If there was no fence and the AMA calls for one where does that put AMA liable. Mike Krizan

abel_pranger

Mike-
As several others have, you are looking for some rational reasons for this action/award. I'm not being facetious here, really....but no logic, nor rational purpose, nor doctrine of fairness, nor any other thought process of normal, sane adults applies to such situations. When lawyers and judges get involved, it is naive to expect an outcome that is in accord with common sense. The rule that prevails in the American tort system is much simpler than that: the party with the deepest pockets is most at fault.
Why AMA would want to bankroll that crap shoot is beyond me.

At $250K per whack, it doesn't take many instances to add up to a sizable percentage of what they take in from our dues. How many bad rolls of the dice would it take to go bust? It is arguable that AMA is not an insurance company, but the insurance sideline sure is a pervasive influence on everything else. Covering the bet on self-insurance is the reason that AMA has to amass large reserves of cash. According to DB, the large cash reserves were deemed too attractive a lure to lawyers, so the Muncie property was acquired and developed to soak up the liquid assets and keep them at bay. "The leg bone's connected to the thigh bone....."
AMA may not be an insurance company, but if it didn't walk like a duck and quack like a duck, it would be something quite different than what it is.

Abel

TheEdge

My Feedback: (788)

You just put into words exactly what I was thinking about this topic and how peole were examining it in detail as if there would be a solid answer that would indicate what could be changed to avoid another case like this.

Well said mate.

hanna

My Feedback: (3)

I asked for more info on the "Stuka Stunt Forum" (it is a c/l stunt forum) and there is more info there. This case is the reason there is a fence around c/l speed circles now(according to responces at SSF). Someone said the guy was unable to fly again, I don't know. Mike Krizan.

J_R

Although I suggested to mongo that this case was not worth discussing, he left his query up.

hanna, you were on the right track.

For the rest of you: this case is definitely over 10 years old, actually 15, I think, and it could be almost 20.

Changes were made in the rules. Any dues rate increases were long ago factored in. Any insurance rate increases were long ago factored in.

JR

abel_pranger

JR-
I get it - the problem is history, AMA fixed it long ago. Ergo, no need to be concerned about the cost of dues/increases in insurances rates.

I don't think that is what you meant to say....

IMHO, the only tangible difference between this suit and current and future ones is that the frequency of their occurrence and cost of settling them is increasing exponentially.

Abel