AA Flight 1420 Captain's Widow Wins 2.1M Lawsuit in Little Rock Crash...

[FN FAL]

Widow of Pilot Awarded $2.1M in Ark. Crash

By DAVID HAMMER
Associated Press Writer

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- A federal jury Thursday ordered the Little Rock National Airport to pay more than $2.1 million to the widow of a pilot killed when his American Airlines jet crashed during a severe thunderstorm six years ago.

While the National Transportation Safety Board had cited errors by Capt. Richard Buschmann, his widow Susan sued the airport in an effort to clear his name. She said the airport had a runway safety zone that failed to meet government standards.

Jurors deliberated less than a half-day before ruling. They rejected the airport's argument that Buschmann contributed to his own death - and the deaths of 10 others - when he elected to land during bad weather.

Flight 1420 sped off a runway near the Arkansas River on June 1, 1999. The plane, still traveling about 90 mph, hit a structure supporting approach lights, broke apart and caught fire. Witnesses said the light tower was 453 feet off the north end of the runway - shy of the government's 1,000-foot standard. After the accident, the airport reconfigured the safety area to remove obstructions.

"I feel like my husband's been exonerated," Susan Buschmann said after the verdict. After jurors left the room, she hugged her lawyers.

Defense lawyers said they would consider an appeal.

In closing arguments, Susan Buschmann's lawyer had told jurors to ask themselves why the approach light system was so close to the runway and why wasn't it designed to break away on impact.

"How could anybody justify putting that two-story steel structure in a place where an airplane is supposed to be safe?" attorney Arthur Wolk asked.

Wolk repeatedly took offense at the airport's lawyers and witnesses' questioning of Buschmann's piloting skills, saying they were impugning a dead man "who can't stand up for himself."

Defense lawyer Richard Watts asked the jury to look at the evidence and not be swayed by such emotional appeals.

"There's no indication that Richard Buschmann wasn't that type of (skillful) pilot, a family man and a good man. (Evidence) simply says that on that night, he was human and made mistakes," Watts said.

.....

 

[AA717driver]

"Exonerated"? I don't think so. Sorry, ma'am.

"...he was human and made mistakes." Great. I'll use that if I ever get violated or kill someone when I do something stupid.

I have no faith in the system of justice in the U.S. anymore.TC

 

[LearLove]

"How could anybody justify putting that two-story steel structure in a place where an airplane is supposed to be safe?" attorney Arthur Wolk asked.


This guy does more damage to aviation than DW, KD and JO put together.

 

[FN FAL]

"Exonerated"? I don't think so. Sorry, ma'am.

"...he was human and made mistakes." Great. I'll use that if I ever get violated or kill someone when I do something stupid.

I have no faith in the system of justice in the U.S. anymore.TC

I thought the main issue with the construction, was that the airport was within compliance when it was constructed.

The way I read this suit, if you complete construction of a building that exceeds building code on one day, then a day later, something gets added to the code that would require a lot of money to retro-fit into an existing building, you are going to suffer the same fate should there be a tragedy.

 

[EagleRJ]

I thought the main issue with the construction, was that the airport was within compliance when it was constructed.

The way I read this suit, if you complete construction of a building that exceeds building code on one day, then a day later, something gets added to the code that would require a lot of money to retro-fit into an existing building, you are going to suffer the same fate should there be a tragedy.

The issue is courts allowing damaged parties to sidestep the primary cause for a tragedy and sue on supporting factors if that is where the money is. The Little Rock airport was in compliance with FAA regulations, but there's no question the concrete approach light towers made things worse. Using the same argument, you could say that the airport enabled the accident by having a runway only 7200' long. The accident obviously would have been minimized or avoided alltogether with a longer runway, but that wasn't the cause of the tragedy.

Lawyers are trying the same thing with lawsuits by the families of some 9/11 victims. The World Trade Center was built in compliance with the building and fire codes of the time, but the fire code was more strict both years before construction began and years after construction finished. It's a thin argument to say "my loved one is dead because your building's stairwells were too narrow". The lawyers are trying, however, since the building's owner is a more accessible financial target than the tragedy's primary guilty party.

 

[habubuaza]

I think the danger here is that attorney's will be embolden. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this was pilot error, but a jury if swayed or convinced can place culpability where it doesn't belong. The danger is if the tables are turned, and some rogue prosecutor wants to charge a crew for murder if a death results from an accident and there is crew error (like most accidents) what's to stop them? Especially now that the US courts are increasing sighting "foreign law" I think this raises serious questions. If you don't think that could happen you're fooling yourself.

 

[FN FAL]

I think the danger here is that attorney's will be embolden. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this was pilot error, but a jury if swayed or convinced can place culpability where it doesn't belong. The danger is if the tables are turned, and some rogue prosecutor wants to charge a crew for murder if a death results from an accident and there is crew error (like most accidents) what's to stop them? Especially now that the US courts are increasing sighting "foreign law" I think this raises serious questions. If you don't think that could happen you're fooling yourself.

They just convicted the manager of an amusement park on a negligence related charge, regarding the death of a rider that died, they were going for Murder II.

If there is a law on the books of a state that makes negligent acts a crime, it is not "rouge" of a prosecutor to attempt to get such a case in front of a judge.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

Sound logic, good presentation

The issue is courts allowing damaged parties to sidestep the primary cause for a tragedy and sue on supporting factors if that is where the money is. The Little Rock airport was in compliance with FAA regulations, but there's no question the concrete approach light towers made things worse. Using the same argument, you could say that the airport enabled the accident by having a runway only 7200' long. The accident obviously would have been minimized or avoided alltogether with a longer runway, but that wasn't the cause of the tragedy.

Lawyers are trying the same thing with lawsuits by the families of some 9/11 victims. The World Trade Center was built in compliance with the building and fire codes of the time, but the fire code was more strict both years before construction began and years after construction finished. It's a thin argument to say "my loved one is dead because your building's stairwells were too narrow". The lawyers are trying, however, since the building's owner is a more accessible financial target than the tragedy's primary guilty party.

Very good points!

 

[TonyC]

I'm surprised they haven't gone after the weather man for allowing that nasty weather to be present during the approach and landing.












.

 

[2000flyer]

This is similar to a story my former CP told me when he flew for a prominent aviation attorney.

Seems a C182 took off over gross and crashed shortly after lift off (in a cemetary no less), killing all on board. This attorney sued Cessna and WON because they designed a baggage compartment big enough to overload.

The AA verdict is a pile of dung and I hope will be overturned in appeal. If it's not, isn't AA able to sue the same authority to recoup the cost of the of the destroyed MD80? Aren't the families of those killed/injured entitled to sue the wife since the federal finding lists her husband as the cause of the accident?

Juries must be reigned in. Period. Whoever denies the need for tort reform needs to have their heads examined!

What a crock folks. What a crock!

2000Flyer

 

[AA717driver]

The Little Rock Airport Authority ought to file bankruptcy, liquidate and force their people to DRIVE to MEM or FSM. I think that might bring home to future juries the lunacy of such verdicts.TC

 

[rvsm410]

I believe the dispatcher for that AA flight was called on the carpet as well by the NTSB and the FAA investigators for allowing the crew to continue to the airport with Sever TS closing in rapidly. This has been a case study in many dispatch classes, used to point out (in 20/20 hindsight) examples of dispatch/Pilot choices that could have or should have been performed in the minutes prior to the approach that may have had a happier outcome.

God Bless those that died, lets all learn from it and work together.

 

[Wesb737fo]

What did William Shakespeare say about lawyers?

 

[joe_pilot]

With our culture of multi-million dollar liability lawsuits and sensational media the general public will never, ever put aviation related accidents or incidents into perspective.

We all wince when we hear of a fellow aviator’s misfortune, mostly because we know that there is probably more than one time we have done something that could have been better thought out. We learn from it. How many times does bad decision making that results in, at worst, fatalities or at least a near miss, make headlines for more than a day when it involves an automobile?

Common sense rarely applies to juries or to John Q. Public, especially if aviation is involved. People just don't get it.

Need I say more?

Fly safe, but Fly.

-J

PS I'm definitely speaking in general and NOT about any accident/incident in particular.

 

[Dodge]

The Little Rock Airport Authority ought to file bankruptcy, liquidate and force their people to DRIVE to MEM or FSM. I think that might bring home to future juries the lunacy of such verdicts.TC

Naw, they'll just raise the prices on parking, concessions, etc....
But I agree. Closing the airport would definately send a message to the LR jury pool.

 

[Guitar Guy]

"How could anybody justify putting that two-story steel structure in a place where an airplane is supposed to be safe?" attorney Arthur Wolk asked.

I was on one of the NTSB accident investigation teams for that accident. It was interesting to note how the approach light support system was changed. When we did the on-site work immediately after the accident, I was able to see the support pylons up close. They were fairly large-diameter steel posts, hollow on the inside with fairly heavy gauge steel. I heard at that time that the reason for those formidable posts was that with the lights being in a flood plain for the Arkansas River, it was difficult to come up with a design that was both frangible and yet could resist floodwaters. The FAA apparently had required frangibility but issued a waiver owing to the proximity of the river.

Fast-forward just a few months to when we were back up in LIT making some runway measurements. I got to see the replacement supports and they were very different - a pair of smaller posts configured in a V-shape instead of the earlier, larger posts. Apparently the new design was more frangible and acceptable to the feds.

When I first heard that Susan Buschmann was suing, I wondered if the design of the original support posts would be an issue. They sure did a number on that plane, essentially breaking the fuselage into 3 pieces. I'd be interested to hear the legal arguments about the original supports, especially if the FAA signed off on them in the first place.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Maybe the wives of the Cali pilots can sue god or mother nature for thoughtlessly installing a mountain right in the middle of their route of flight.

Pilots make mistakes, even though they might be good pilots.

Real men fess up to their failures and faults. It is a disgrace that this woman cannot deal with the reality that her husband was largely responsible for this accident. I have no sympathy for her whatsoever. Her need to rationalize her husband's error is quite clear here, but shows a clear lack of character and maturity on her part.

The no-fault society we are building for ourselves will be our eventual downfall.
People no longer want to be responsible for their own actions.

And a certain "aviation lawyer" is a poison in the American justice system.
I'd pay fifty bucks to slap him into next week.

 

[FN FAL]

I'd pay fifty bucks to slap him into next week.

Why, what's happening next week?

 

[TonyC]

Why, what's happening next week?

For one thing, Susan Buschmann will wake up and realize she's still a widow.






.

 

[FN FAL]

For one thing, Susan Buschmann will wake up and realize she's still a widow.

That's the sad part about the concept of civil or criminal justice...for the dead, there is none.

 

[Wankel7]

Naw, they'll just raise the prices on parking, concessions, etc....
But I agree. Closing the airport would definately send a message to the LR jury pool.

And all the cargo planes that gas up there.....EEKKK

 

[gern_blanston]

But I agree. Closing the airport would definately send a message to the LR jury pool.

If the average jurist could see into next week. Most folks are so short-sighted, they probably wouldn't make the connectioin.
Like my dad always said, "The masses are asses."

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Hey, lighten up! This lady needs some income!

 

[mattpilot]

Hey, lighten up! This lady needs some income!

What happened to life insurance?

 

[sqwkvfr]

"I feel like my husband's been exonerated," Susan Buschmann said

Flashbacks of Jean Carnahan.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I wonder what perspective we'd have if we were the jury and gathered all the facts of the case instead of a news report designed to invoke emotions and increase readership.....

Not only did the widow's lawyers present the case, but a jury agreed.

If we are to shun lawyers then how about the juries and judges that concur with them!!

Things that make you go...hmmmmm