Trying to predict what the court would do is what this whole discussion has been about. My approach to the case has been contingent on defining the "non-club" field as the "last clear chance". In otherwords, if the club has a frequency control method in place, makes a reasonable attempt to determine that the frequencies are open prior to flying, the non-club field begins operations with the full knowledge that the club exists, and does not attempt to determine which frequencies are in use prior to flying subsequently causing damage, then they had the "last clear chance" to avoid the cause, and are subsequently liable. Being the property owner does not give one the right or privilege to cause damage to another's person or property through negligent actions.

This is a double edged sword, in that if the club-owned field doesn't make a reasonable attempt to determine if the channel is clear prior to flying, they could be considered to have the last clear chance, and could be held liable. Consequently my proposal that the club institute use of a frequency monitor to determine if the channel is in use prior to flying.

Brad