Plane That Hit Queens Neighborhood Subject To Maritime Laws
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
May 10, 2006 11:01 a.m.
--
NEW YORK (AP)--The crash of American Airlines Flight 587 in a quiet residential neighborhood nearly five years ago is subject to general maritime laws, a judge ruled Tuesday, allowing potentially higher damages for dozens of people who sued.
U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet said it didn't matter that the plane crashed on land in Queens, killing 260 people on the plane and five on the ground. He noted that the plane was on a 1,500-mile transoceanic flight to the Dominican Republic.
"There can be no question that, but for the development of air travel, this trip - or some portion thereof - would have been conducted by a waterborne vessel and that it therefore bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity," the judge wrote in a 78-page opinion analyzing the issue.
Flight 587 had just taken off from John F. Kennedy International Airport on Nov. 12, 2001, when a section of its tail tore away as its pilot battled turbulence.
Numerous lawsuits were filed, though all have been settled except for those involving eight passengers and three people killed on the ground and more than 20 cases involving injury or property damage on the ground.
The judge noted in his ruling that there was no direct precedent for the facts at stake in the plane crash and that the defendants contended a plane must crash on the high seas, far from land, to be subject to maritime laws. Such laws generally allow for broader reasons for giving damages.
The judge said the aircraft's vertical stabilizer, a large metal and composite structure, plummeted into Jamaica Bay from an altitude of about 2,500 feet and was retrieved with the use of a crane.
"The general features of the incident may be described fairly as a large piece of an aircraft sinking in navigable waters," he said.
He said it was of no consequence whether Jamaica Bay is used for commercial traffic.
He said the accident also qualified as a maritime disaster because it falls within a class of incidents that have potential effects on maritime commerce and because it was a transoceanic flight that bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity.
Lawyers for the defendants - American Airlines; its Fort Worth, Texas, parent, AMR Corp. (AMR); and the plane's maker, Airbus Industrie G.I.E. - didn't immediately return telephone messages for comment Tuesday.
A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Robert Spragg, said he had not seen the ruling and could not comment
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
May 10, 2006 11:01 a.m.
--
NEW YORK (AP)--The crash of American Airlines Flight 587 in a quiet residential neighborhood nearly five years ago is subject to general maritime laws, a judge ruled Tuesday, allowing potentially higher damages for dozens of people who sued.
U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet said it didn't matter that the plane crashed on land in Queens, killing 260 people on the plane and five on the ground. He noted that the plane was on a 1,500-mile transoceanic flight to the Dominican Republic.
"There can be no question that, but for the development of air travel, this trip - or some portion thereof - would have been conducted by a waterborne vessel and that it therefore bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity," the judge wrote in a 78-page opinion analyzing the issue.
Flight 587 had just taken off from John F. Kennedy International Airport on Nov. 12, 2001, when a section of its tail tore away as its pilot battled turbulence.
Numerous lawsuits were filed, though all have been settled except for those involving eight passengers and three people killed on the ground and more than 20 cases involving injury or property damage on the ground.
The judge noted in his ruling that there was no direct precedent for the facts at stake in the plane crash and that the defendants contended a plane must crash on the high seas, far from land, to be subject to maritime laws. Such laws generally allow for broader reasons for giving damages.
The judge said the aircraft's vertical stabilizer, a large metal and composite structure, plummeted into Jamaica Bay from an altitude of about 2,500 feet and was retrieved with the use of a crane.
"The general features of the incident may be described fairly as a large piece of an aircraft sinking in navigable waters," he said.
He said it was of no consequence whether Jamaica Bay is used for commercial traffic.
He said the accident also qualified as a maritime disaster because it falls within a class of incidents that have potential effects on maritime commerce and because it was a transoceanic flight that bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity.
Lawyers for the defendants - American Airlines; its Fort Worth, Texas, parent, AMR Corp. (AMR); and the plane's maker, Airbus Industrie G.I.E. - didn't immediately return telephone messages for comment Tuesday.
A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Robert Spragg, said he had not seen the ruling and could not comment
