Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Get a load of this scumbag

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

dashtrasher

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2002
Posts
154
Airlines should be liable for attacks: lawyer
Thursday May 1, 7:42 pm ET
By Gail Appleson


NEW YORK, May 1 (Reuters) - American Airlines and United Airlines should be held liable for the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks because they did not stop hijackers from entering the cockpits of the four hijacked planes, a lawyer for victims' families argued on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT


The lawyer, Marc Moller, made his arguments in a hearing aimed at determining whether litigation can proceed against six groups of defendants, including American and United, which are units of AMR Corp. (NYSE:AMR - News) and UAL Corp. (OTC BB:UALAQ.OB - News),respectively.

The defendants include other carriers who shared responsibility for setting up airline security, Boeing Co. (NYSE:BA - News), airport operators and the owner and the leaseholder of the World Trade Center.

They are suing for unspecified damages.

The hearing, which will continue on Friday in Manhattan federal court, involves more than 60 claims filed by families of victims who were killed on the ground. The outcome of the hearing is being widely watched because it will determine whether other families choose to join the litigation instead of seeking payment from a national compensation fund.

The defendants have asked U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein to dismiss the lawsuits. If he decides to allow litigation to proceed, he will consider claims brought by families of those aboard the four planes used in the attacks.

More than 3,000 people were killed in the hijacked airline attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon and in the crash in rural Pennsylvania.

"The airlines accepted the responsibility of preventing those people from getting into the cockpit. ... The airlines are responsible for the consequences," Moller said. "Negligence comes down to control of the planes."

But the airlines argue they should not be held liable because the unprecedented attacks were unforeseeable and they had followed safety measures required by the federal government.

"No remotely similar event has ever happened in the history of aviation," said Roger Podesta, an American Airline lawyer.

Jeffrey Ellis, a lawyer representing United, said that the government decides what threats must be addressed by airlines and that these type of suicide hijackings had never been envisioned.

Hellerstein said that the airlines knew there was a risk of hijackings and questioned why security measures should be different because hijackers might be on suicide missions.

Ellis said there would be a difference including greater efforts to deter attackers. He also pointed out that President George W. Bush signed legislation last November to allow commercial airline pilots to carry guns as defense against cockpit intruders.

But Moller said that airlines realized prior to Sept. 11 that terrorists wanted to attack the United States. "By the year 2001, suicide was the great fear," he said.
 
And people wonder why lawyer's have such a bad reputation?
 
I don't know about everyone else, but my opinion of lawyers has not changed.
 
It's all fun and games...

Till someone pokes an eye out.

Was it a surprise that someone was going to sue? Or that the airlines were going to be listed as defendants. I bet when all is said and done...even the firm that made the girder bolts that pulled out/snapped when the floors collapsed, gets listed as a defendant.

I don't portend to be an expert in 121 Regs, but I do seem to remember that no emergency exit could be blocked from occupants in a plane? So that's why the pilots in the past left the door open during take off and landing? But anyway, I do seem to remember them DC-9 doors being open on the few flights I rode on with NWA in the distant past. I also remember thinking how vulnerable the flight deck looked, from the back. So is it the fault of the airlines that a reg said the doors had to be open?

I knew we would see something like this lawsuit sooner or later. As far as condemning lawyers...yea it's all fun and games, till you got a state trooper that oversteps his bounds or a piece of a modern parking ramp fails and your grandmother falls 50 feet to her death while watching the 4th of July fireworks show downtown(GRB). It's funny how fast they tore down that parking ramp...good design and construction engineering, I'm sure. Yea...everbody hates lawyers, till it's show ME the money time.

But anyway...should be real INTERESTING to see how this goes. I'm not riding on one side or the other on this...I'm just saying, IS it a surprise that it's happening?
 
I think we should cap the amounts awarded in class action law suits to a reasonable level. If the dollar amounts awarded for basically frivolous law suits were substantially lower I believe that some of them would go away. The less money class action lawyers can get the less of them we would see. Just an observation.
 
Tort Reform
 
you might remember this one...

about 3 to 5 years ago I was reading in one of the popular flying rags about a case where two partners owned a small plane.

Partner A was flying it and crashed it on a hillside near town. Partner B gets a phone call almost immediately after the crash from someone at the airport that knew the both of them. So partner B jumps up from work or home. Drives fast through the neighbor hood to get to the scene...hits Dude A getting his mail from the street corner mail box. Tragic. Well anyway widow of Dude A sues the ESTATE of dead Partner A. Think about it for a second.

Widow of Dude A, sues widow of partner A...because partner B was rushing to the aid of his partner and in that state, if a good samaritan is rushing to your aid and harms or kill you in the response...you can sue the person that needed the aid in the first place. JUDGE was smart...tossed it out.

I believe the guy that was driving the pickup...partner B, should be held accountable for the wrongfull death of Dude A. Fair and Square. Not the widow and the estate of the dead pilot.

Be careful out there.
 
There used to be a limit on the value of human life and it was determined to be $800,000. This used to be the cap in aviation but I dont know what happened to it. Does any one know?
 
As far as condemning lawyers...yea it's all fun and games, till you got a state trooper that oversteps his bounds or a piece of a modern parking ramp fails and your grandmother falls 50 feet to her death while watching the 4th of July fireworks show downtown(GRB). It's funny how fast they tore down that parking ramp...good design and construction engineering, I'm sure. Yea...everbody hates lawyers, till it's show ME the money time.

I think the reason people condemn lawyers is b/c of the BS cases that some of them will choose to take. I for one don't have a problem with all lawyers...only the ones that choose to take rediculous cases. I.E. the case of the lady who burned herself when she spilled her HOT coffee on her. "I didn't know it would be hot" she said. I also despise judges that don't look at people and cases like that and immediately toss them out of the courtroom. The justice system needs to be checked! Suing for a legitamate <sp?> cause is one thing...suing b/c you are just mad or want money (without having to work for it) is rediculous and wastes everybodies time and money.
 
Portend: INDICATE, SIGNIFY.

One entry found for portend.


Main Entry: por·tend
Pronunciation: por-'tend, pOr-
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin portendere, from por- forward (akin to per through) + tendere to stretch -- more at FOR, THIN
Date: 15th century
1 : to give an omen or anticipatory sign of.
2 : INDICATE, SIGNIFY.
 
All it took was a few passengers with box cutters to take control of an airliner ??


This case doesn't surprise me one bit. If you consider the numerous attempts to enter the cockpit that occurred prior to 9-11 and that the airlines did next to nothing to improve flight deck security then this case will be relatively easy to prove in court.



I am in no way happy to see monetary damages find their way into the pockets of more lawyers but the airlines and the FAA have ignored their responsibility on this one.

Let the flames begin.
 
Until judges start dropping these cases like third period French, we'll continue to see the kind of ambulance chasing we've been seeing here. So long as the justice system supports and encourages the "better to sue for a dollar then work for a dollar" mentality, and make no mistake it DOES SUPPORT and ENCOURAGE this sort of behavior, we'll continue to see not only rediculous cases like these in the court rooms, but all over your TV set as well (anyone count the number of "People's Court" type shows that have popped up on daytime TV?).

Unfortunately, until the Judicial System grows a pair and starts calling these fools out, we'll continue to see the law used as a punchline of the joke we call modern American society.

Don't like it? I'd suggest writing your congressmen and letting them know it's time to put a stop to this.

But you know, that's just my opinion.. I could be wrong.

Paul
 
Like TMMT said:

TORT REFORM!!!!!!!!!!!

BobbySamd???
 
I hate lawyers and I like Bobby's posts so I am hoping like hell Bobby doesnt work fo some a-hole ambulance chaser.

America is going to go to hell because of these guys.
 
Eliminate the lawyer fee from the jury awards and you will eliminate the frivolous trials. People need to be held responsible for their own actions. If a product is defective, it is another story. If a product was misused, then the person is held responsible, not the product.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top