Judge Tosses Arkansas Plane Crash Lawsuit On A Technicality | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

AMA Drone Report

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday

Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne-Unmanned w/AUVSI

Airborne On ANN

AMA 04.27.17

Airborne
04.24.17

Airborne
04.25.17

Airborne
04.26.17

Airborne
04.27.17

Airborne
04.28.17

Airborne-Unmanned 04.25.17

Airborne-YouTube

AMA 04.27.17

Airborne
04.24.17

Airborne
04.25.17

Airborne
04.26.17

Airborne
04.27.17

Airborne
04.28.17

Airborne-Unmanned 04.25.17

Thu, Sep 20, 2012

Judge Tosses Arkansas Plane Crash Lawsuit On A Technicality

Plaintiff's Attorney Did Not Present Compelling Evidence At Trial

A judge in Washington County, AR, has thrown out a lawsuit stemming from an aviation accident because the plaintiff did not present sufficient evidence about the accident's cause.

The Associated Press reports that according to the Northwest Arkansas Times, Judge Joanna Taylor dismissed the case because the attorney for plaintiff Barry Giblow did not offer sufficient evidence for the trial to continue.

According to the NTSB's probable cause report, while on final approach to the destination airport, the airplane experienced a loss of engine power. The airplane impacted terrain in a nose low attitude and came to rest adjacent to a fence, several hundred yards short of the runway, resulting in substantial damage. During the recovery of the airplane a total of 1.75 gallons of fuel was recovered from both wing fuel tanks. The fuel tanks had not been compromised and had an unusable fuel total of 3 gallons. The commercial pilot reported to law enforcement personnel that they had not refueled prior to the return flight.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause of the accident to be the pilot’s improper fuel management, which resulted in a loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.

The NTSB report is not admissible as evidence in a court of law.

While the NTSB said fuel management was the issue, each person on board the airplane told the agency that the other was acting as PIC of the Cessna 150 when it went down. Giblow had sued Jimmy Crawford, the other person on board, for $250,000. Both are certified pilots.

Giblow's attorney asked the judge to allow him to re-open the case at a later date, but she said state law does not allow her to take that action.

FMI: www.co.washington.ar.us

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (04.29.17)

Beechcraft Heritage Museum The Beechcraft Heritage Museum is a distinctly original one-of-a-kind, “living and working” aviation museum that traces the lineage of the Be>[...]

AMA Drone Report 04.27.17: Kitty Hawk Flyer, College Drones, DJI VR Goggles

Also: Airborne at XPONENTIAL, AMA On Mil-Airspace, Canadian Drones, AMA Legislative Efforts With an appearance not all that different than many of the multi-copters we’re all>[...]

Airborne-Unmanned 04.25.17: UAS Broadcast, College Drone Racing, XPO17 LIVE!

Also: Aeryon Labs, Northrop Grumman, XTAR Connectivity, Bowling Green Drones The broadcast platforms of tomorrow may well be unmanned... and 360 Designs has just introduced the Fly>[...]

Airborne 04.28.17: Perlan Mission II, DJI VR Goggles, Pilot... NOT!

Also: American Airlines, Airborne-NextGen, Biofuel, ATR 72-600, Gogo, Drone Drive, L3 Aviation Airbus Perlan Mission II, an initiative to fly a glider to the edge of space to colle>[...]

AUVSI and Aero-News Announce Live Webcast Schedules for XPONENTIAL 2017

The World's Greatest Gathering Of 'All Things Unmanned' Will Get Expert Live Coverage! The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) and their "Airborne-Unmann>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2017 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC