Dead Pilot's Estate Listed in Twin Otter Skydiving Crash:

[skydivinguy]

I remember several years ago someones parents got past the waiver and sued a DZ because of emotional distress at seeing the "child" bounce, not sure of the outcome tho.

Pretty $hitty these people filing this lawsuit this quick! Wonder how they decided that PWC was at fault? Suing the airport for what, fueling the plane, geez!

 

[FN FAL]

I remember several years ago someones parents got past the waiver and sued a DZ because of emotional distress at seeing the "child" bounce, not sure of the outcome tho.

That is not getting past the waiver.

 

[Van Hooydonk]

FN FAL, the fact that the heirs, next of kin, etc... did not sign the waiver is of no significance--you CAN waive their right to sue. While at first blush it may appear logical that the deceased cannot waive the rights of another, this is not the case in a derivative action, such as wrongful death. Since the only rights that heirs have, are those that are passed on by the dead skydiver, the skydiver can effectively terminate those rights at his death by signing a waiver. Think of it like giving away your valuables before you die, so that your heirs get nothing. Aside from the wrongful death claim that was waived, the heirs have no legal remedy over the death of their son, daughter, mom, etc. It would be no different than if your best friend was killed in a skydiving accident. Yes, you would be upset and suffer a great loss--maybe even a greater loss than if one of your parents was killed-- but you have no legally recognizable cause of action.

That said, you can never waive gross negligence. FN FAl you were right on the money about this. This a matter of public policy. The rationale for this is that at some level the law will hold you responsible for your actions, if they are viewed eggregious. For example lets say that the guy who was performing maintenance on the PT-6s of the Otter was not an A&P and everything he knew about engines he learned in vo-tech class for auto engines. If the otter went down because of his faulty repair to some engine component, the waiver will be stuck down. Or lets say the guy who repacked your main and reserve chutes never hooked the canopies to the risers. This conduct would probably rise to the level of gross negligence and the waiver would be unenforceable.

I can tell you this as well. If these waivers were not ironclad, the sport of skydiving as we know it would not exist in the US. Of course, smart DZ owners know as well, that carrying no insurance, not owning any tangible assets, and alerting potential litigants of this as soon as possible discourages would-be litigants. I would bet that most of the DZs that use Otters lease them. My personal favorite is the tandem rig mfgr named "The Uninsured Relatiave Workshop" The beauty of this name, is that not only does it alert attorneys of no insurance, but should a case somehow get past all the other hurdles and make it to trial, the jury will know that the defendant is uninsured, by the name of the company. In most jurisdictions you are not allowed to mention insurance to jurors during a trial.

Also some DZs, Perris Valley comes to mind, make you sign the wiavers and give a recorded statement in front of a video camera, that you know what you are signing and what you are doing. They keep this on file, I imagine to show your heirs in case they get any ideas about a lawsuit.

All this said, the usual disclaimer applies... I am not a lawyer...the above is not intended to be legal advice...nor should it be used as such...yada,yada, yada. Blue skies, black death.

 

[kevdog]

I remember several years ago someones parents got past the waiver and sued a DZ because of emotional distress at seeing the "child" bounce, not sure of the outcome tho.

That's why we played bounce bingo. It took about 8 years but someone won about a grand.