What do you think of this possible lawsuit?

After the 11 deaths from a plane crash at the Reno Air Races, there is now talk of civil lawsuits.

http://www.rgj.com/article/20110922/EVENTS05/110921044/Experts-Disclaimer-Reno-Air-Races-ticket-won-t-stop-civil-lawsuits

The disclaimer on Reno National Championship Air Race tickets saying the holder of the ticket assumes responsibility for any injures suffered while attending the event will not stop victims of last week’s crash from collecting through civil lawsuits, legal experts said Wednesday.

Experts say a 2008 Nevada Supreme Court ruling in favor of the owners of a Las Vegas minor league baseball team that was sued by spectators who were injured by a foul ball will not apply in any air race lawsuits because the risks of being hit by a ball are not the same as having an experimental aircraft break apart and explode on the tarmac.

Reno lawyer Tom Drendel said that court ruling will not apply in any Reno Air Race lawsuits because the highly modified WWII fighter planes in the race were not adequately tested to ensure that they were safe.

“If they are in essence experimenting with modifications, that’s almost reckless conduct by the participants and the officials,” Drendel said. “The spectator at the air races can’t be expected to assume a risk that the pilot is not even sure about because he’s pushing the envelope.”

But Matt Jackson, vice-president of the Unlimited Class of planes, which included the P-51 Mustang that slammed into the ground feet from VIP box seats, killing 11 and injuring dozens, said the planes are not slapped together but are intricately designed aircraft built by highly trained engineers.

Jackson said the accident was the result of pilot error, not shoddy aircraft designs or the failure of the race organizers to ensure safe aircraft participate in the races.

“It was the mistake of one individual in making a critical decision — a decision that didn’t work out,” Jackson said. “It wasn’t deliberate. It was an accident — just like the accidents that happen every day out on the highway.”

According to Jackson, Jimmy Leeward, pilot of the ill-fated Galloping Ghost, made the mistake of using his “elevator trim tab” to control his plane during the Unlimited race on Friday, and the trim tab broke off, causing the plane to shoot into the air.

The G-force from the sharp pitch caused Leeward to black out, and then fall on his control stick, which made the plane turn and then nosedive into the ground, said Jackson, who has been racing these planes for 20 years.


Lawsuits

Drendel and San Francisco lawyer Gerald Sterns said the risks associated with foul balls are known, while spectators at air races should not assume that the racing planes will fall apart and crash.

“That law (concerning foul balls and baseball games) will not stand up to this kind of catastrophic risk,” Sterns said.

Drendel agreed.

“The difference here between the baseball games and the air races is that the nature of the air races is that they are not taking adequate precautions to make sure the planes are satisfying rigid safety criteria,” Drendel said.

“I don’t think anyone would attend an air race if they thought the airplanes would fall from the sky,” he said.

So are there any opinions on this? Is a disclaimer on the back of a ticket good enough to prevent lawsuits? Should spectators at race events have knowledge that it's possible a plane or race car might crash into the stands?

No, life has many risks and can't always be prevented.

If you buy the ticket you assume the risks and that is what the disclaimer on the ticket says. It's unfortunate that 10 people died as a result of the Reno event and I feel for their friends and families but disclaimers are part of the ticket and risk is a part of the experience.

There are no guarantees in life. Those who bought the tickets assumed the risk. The organizers and participants did all that could be reasonably expected to make it safe.

This is just some more ambulance chasing by greedy lawyers, IMO.

It's your responsibility to be aware of risks. Planes crash.

Regardless of what is on the back of the ticket, there is always someone who will look to place responsibility on another. I read experimental, adequately tested, etc. etc. In other words don't ever have anyone attend an event (Drag racing, car racing in general) come to mind since those are all experimental vehicles and the testing is being done on the race track. This is akin to the Mcdonalds coffee incident. Someone advocating having others taking on your personal responsibility. Simply stupid and greedy. It is a wonder that a lawsuit isn't being brought on behalf of the dead pilot for the same reasons. I find the whole lawsuit disgusting. Loss of life does not have a dollar value, but those who experience the loss could be helped in a variety of ways to make it a personal matter, a gesture with empathy, something lawsuits lack entirely.

Devil's Advocate here.

What if you found out that --

The pilot had written a suicide note before taking off?
A maintenance guy had long ago noticed the wing assembly was faulty, but the owners said So What?
Engineers had said there was an XXXXXXXXXX% chance the incident would occur where it did (per design or maintenance of facilities, mechanics of flyovers or whatever) while the statistical risk at similar shows is only X%?

If you can never sue the guy, what is his inducement not to do those things to you? Just his ordinary good will toward men? I have precious little faith in the judicial system, but even less in man's willingness to always do the right thing without a strong motivation.

I believe that the general rule is that when the risk is reasonably foreseeable, you have assumed it. But if it's out of character for any activity that someone would "reasonably" envision or voluntarily participate in -- like being assigned to a row of seats on the landing strip, or being outright stabbed to death by the pilot after he lands the plane -- there may be liability on the part of those in control. Someplace between extremes is "reasonably foreseeable."

In this case, I'd think that if there is even a weensy chance that any liability might be established, the damages in this sort of event are so vast that the insurance carriers have already mentally written checks for their policy limits. That's not because they feel responsible, but rather because even 1% of those incredible damages would still be the full policy amount.

Speaking of insurance policies, the health insurance carriers of the victims (who survived) may have the first right to any money recovered. Here again, the amounts are so astronomical that they can't even be calculated. If any of those people were uninsured and are entitled to Medicare or Medicaid, that is an additional factor to consider.

BA, the pilot is dead, who would be responsible now? The airshow, the family, the aircraft mechanic?

Is a disclaimer on the back of a ticket good enough to prevent lawsuits?

I would guess probably not, or these event organizers wouldn't bother to pay for liability insurance. I've seen pieces of cars fly into the stands at race tracks too. I would guess the smaller incidents are settled out of court to save having to pay the lawyers.

Depends on if it is decided as an accident or negligence.

The dead and injured should be out of luck, what will happen here is the insurance companies will settle out of court, people will get medical care and some compensation.