My attys have told me you can't release liability
    for anyone else -- not even for a spouse, who can
    still file after someone's demise. It only means you
    won't sue.

    You can indemify, defend and hold harmless against
    third party claims -- provided you (or your estate)
    has the assets to fund such a defense and pay any
    resulting claims.

    Scott Gettings

    Does anybody have factual information on a case where some one
successfully sued someone for an alleged defective experimental
aircraft? I don't think such a case exist.


    Paul Lamar


I don't have Lexus/Nexus access, but there sure is a lot of legal
activity out there if there were no suits:

Scott Gettings

My first reaction is "I do and there ain't;" but, I do know there is one
federal case out there out of Texas saying that "non-experimental"
aircraft would have a hard time disclaiming liability for design, where
they admittedly had disclaimed pretty much all other type of liability
for their negligence in manufacture and workmanship. Now, while I would
suggest the "non-experimental" wording should be enough to indicate that
would not apply even to design defects in these kind of situations, much
less workmanship errors, obviously there can never be a guarantee of no
suits.

If you can sue the president for alleged peccadillo's and, perhaps even
as the old saw indicates, the pope for bastardy, perhaps while you can
do so, you have to realize the odds of prevailing are not as good in the
pope's case (in this day and age) and probably even less where someone
has purchased a wrecked experimental aircraft with sufficient intent to
release and/or indemnify any/all prior workmen from any liability.
Especially as the thing would have to be rebuilt before use, so you will
have to face the obvious proof question of how you gonna prove who done
what and/that caused what? I can almost promise you that you are
probably not going to find any plaintiff's lawyer willing to do such a
suit on a contingent fee.

And, perhaps even more, especially, with a rather evil handling little
aircraft like a Seahawk based machine, one of which I already own and am
slowly working a rotary into. <g>  Therefore, having bought and sold
experimentals, I can assure you I have made a pretty good attempt to
look for and/or eliminate such liability problems.

And, to further search all fifty states and all federal circuits further
to find the absence of any such case law would be a rather extensive
task, which I would not want to do for free.  Now, if any of you good
folks out there want to pay for such a search, we can talk further. <g>
I would suggest to you that Paul is probably right.

Scott: You may also want to read Kolczynski's stuff in his aviation law
page and in avweb's page rather than just to refer to them to simply
further confirm that Paul is probably correct. They all seem to agree
that while there have been some suits, none of which were apparently
appealed sufficiently to make much for appellate case review record
reporting, not one seems to have prevailed; and, that is where something
is sold as a flying aircraft, not someone's obviously defective (at
least, one you know is not flying very well when purchased) wreck.

jofarr, soddy tn


Ok, agreed, you may not be able to escape liability, however, there are
very common and legit ways in which you can protect your assets even
with personal liability.  Some states are more accommodating to this
than others. For instance, in the Great State of Texas it is almost
impossible (meaning other than taxing authority and or purchase money
agreements) to loose your homestead regardless of value.  Planning is
the key.  However, this planning MUST be in place BEFORE there is a
problem.  fwiw.

All the best,

Chris Barber
Houston,
Attorney and Cop

Several years ago I read of a purchase contract that included wording like
"This aircraft, being a dangerous conveyance, is waranteed to be the cause
of death or severe injury to the purchaser or associates of the purchaser
by 100 years from the calendar date of purchase."  This seemed like a
clever way to get out of liability.  How can the purchaser (or other
interested parties) sue the seller when the terms of the sale included a
warantee to cause damages?  Then again, if no death or destruction, who's
going sue for breach (except for maybe a unhappy wife..)?  I don't have
any idea whether this is actually useful legally or just clever.


Regards,

Matt-

In this same train of thought. I've wondered about writing in a bill or
agreement of sale--' This aircraft is sold in a 'non' Airworthy condition.
All Airworthyness and certification processes to approve this airframe for
flight must be accomplished by the purchaser or in the purchasers interest.'
Basically stating that you are selling an Un-Airworthy airframe to the
seller which must then put it back into airworthy condition. Or at least
show by some Notation that they have completed a Condition inspection [ or
whatever inspection you want to call it] and has stated from this inspection
that the aircraft is airworthy to their standards.  Not sure if it would
hold water in court but might help to show you did try to do your 'Due
Diligance' to the purchaser.

On another note, Paul, I'll get you a copy of that engine model when I get
it completed, may take me some time but..  I have confidence that it will be
exact in every detail. Should help show where issues will come from [ ie;
bolts on the flywheel/flexplate that might not be on current models] I do
this for a living so I'll keep it to the standards of which I would hold my
day job to. Btw.. sorry for all the spelling mistakes on the last post..
gonna have to start reading my posts over BEFORE hitting send...  :-)

Jarrett Johnson