Hi again,
I am about 10 hours from my Commercial ticket and plan to have my CFI
my the end of the year.

AOPA legal plan would be ~$52/year for Commercial/CFI

Any comments...good/bad/indifferent???

Thanks, Don
Don Byrer
Instrument Pilot Commercial/CFI Student
Electronics Technician, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
Amateur Radio KJ5KB

"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without bending the gear..."

Don Byrer wrote:
> Hi again,
> I am about 10 hours from my Commercial ticket and plan to have my CFI
> my the end of the year.
> AOPA legal plan would be ~$52/year for Commercial/CFI
> Any comments...good/bad/indifferent???

I never had it until two years ago.
Now, I include it with each year's renewal.
It's not just the FAA you have to contend with nowadays.
Without some type of insurance to cover legal advice, the government
will roll over you.

When I went for my FAA interview for my current job the FSDO dude asked
me if I was a member of AOPA. I said yes then he asked if I had the
legal services plan. I said no. He said "get it!". I did.
I fly the ADIZ and FRZ five times a week.
Michelle

Don Byrer wrote:

>Hi again,
>I am about 10 hours from my Commercial ticket and plan to have my CFI
>my the end of the year.
>
>AOPA legal plan would be ~$52/year for Commercial/CFI
>
>Any comments...good/bad/indifferent???
>
>Thanks, Don
>Don Byrer
>Instrument Pilot Commercial/CFI Student
>Electronics Technician, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
>Amateur Radio KJ5KB
>
>"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without bending the gear..."
>
>

Don Byrer wrote:
>
> Any comments...good/bad/indifferent???

I regard it as cheap insurance. The yearly cost wouldn't pay for 15 minutes of a
lawyer's time if I got in trouble.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Read the fine print. It's useless.


"Don Byrer" > wrote in message
...
> Hi again,
> I am about 10 hours from my Commercial ticket and plan to have my CFI
> my the end of the year.
>
> AOPA legal plan would be ~$52/year for Commercial/CFI
>
> Any comments...good/bad/indifferent???
>
> Thanks, Don
> Don Byrer
> Instrument Pilot Commercial/CFI Student
> Electronics Technician, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
> Amateur Radio KJ5KB
>
> "I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without
> bending the gear..."

I'm a participating attorney on the plan. I don't know what other
participating attorneys do, but I field at least a call every week from
a pilot, aircraft owner, or other interested aviation person who needs
legal advice. I dispense it free of charge, albeit with the hope that
if it passes beyond that first call, I'll get retained and perhaps
compensated for my efforts.

Just my $.02, but a single half-hour consult at the plan rate of $150
an hour means you're getting $75 of value for your $52.

Blue skies to all,

Darrell Clay
Cleveland, Ohio
http://ifrpilot.blogspot.com

Terry Briggs wrote:
> Read the fine print. It's useless.
>

Care to elaborate?

On 6 Sep 2005 13:57:26 -0700, "
> wrote in
. com>::

>I dispense it free of charge,

Darrell Clay,

Thank you for your input on this matter. But isn't it customary for
the majority of attorneys to provide an initial phone consultation to
potential clients without fee? At least that's been my experience. If
so, what benefit accrues to the AOPA Legal Services plan member for
the fee he pays? I have some idea of the answer to that question, but
I'd like to hear your response. Thanks again.

In article >,
"Terry Briggs" > wrote:

> Read the fine print. It's useless.
>
>


Wow, great comments...

??????

Hmm, I read the fine print and your COMMENTS are worthless!

--
Chris Schmelzer, MD
University of Arizona, UPH Kino

Don,

I am also an attorney on the AOPA legal services plan. My area of
practice is primarily aviation law. Under the terms of the plan I have
had to attend an AOPA legal services seminar within a certain period of
time (the file is at the office so I don't have the details in front of
me) for which I have had to pay. Even though I am actively
representing pilots and mechanics in matters brought by the FAA, the
seminar is almost always very valuable to me and I use information
provided almost immediately.

That being said, my experience is that I get a call from a pilot or
mechanic about once every two weeks or so. Each person calling is
frightened. He (almost invariably he, women are only 6% of pilots and
tend to get in trouble very rarely) has never, ever been in trouble
with the FAA before and has slipped up in some fashion or there has
been a communication problem that has caught the pilot on the short end
of the stick and the FAA is either inquiring into the situation or
actively taking action against the pilot.

The other calls are from pilots who have bought an airplane and didn't
bother to pay for a prebuy inspection and have discovered that they
bought themselves an absolute piece of junk, sight unseen, for a very
low price, from someone a long ways away. And they are ****ed.

Under the terms of the agreement I have signed with the AOPA, I am to
give a certain amount of free consultation to members of the legal
services plan. I don't recall how much time it is, and I don't care,
I'll generally go to an hour in that first phone call, I want to do
what I can for a fellow pilot. About one in five of the callers lie to
me and tell me they are members of the plan. I know I should call and
check on them before I continue the call, but I never do. I check
after the call. Okay, I'm a sucker, but usually the guy is big time
scared and I'm going to do what I can to help him. Besides, the hourly
rate that I get paid through the plan is well below what my firm
insists that I normally charge, so I'm not making much money on the
deal. When I was learning to fly a heck of a lot of guys helped me out
and gave me guidance, so I figure I'm paying them back in some fashion
by helping out pilots now.

If I wind up representing the pilot, I have signed an agreement that
sets the maximum hourly fee I can charge to pilots on the legal
services plan. For pilots not on the plan, I have to charge the fee my
firm sets, which is substantially higher. The thing I've discovered
over the years is that the weak spot in a pilot's defense, especially
where he is clearly not guilty, is the money available to pay for the
defense. (Yes, attorneys do sometimes work for free, but they have to
eat, and the free work is usally for the poor, and unless the pilot is
a young flight instructor, few fit into that category <g>.)

What I've found is that most of the time, the FAA doesn't bring an
action unless it's got a good case, so it's a challenge defending the
pilot. However, I've also found that the FAA goes for a lot more
penalty than is appropriate, and because the AOPA legal plan pays, I
have the time to work with the pilot to get to the heart of the matter
and find out the circumstances in detail, because there are often more
defenses than are apparent on first examination. Plus, about a third
of the actions are purely political, a professional pilot has gotten on
the wrong side of an FAA inspector and the inspector is just looking
for an excuse to hammer the pilot. (On top of all of that, many pilots
don't call me until after they have spoken to the FAA and have managed
to admit everything, thus taking away any defenses they might well have
honestly had - if the call me early the chances of a successful defense
are far higher and if they know they have money for representation,
they are more likely to call me early, when they first get a call from
the FAA.) So, with some money available to the pilot, I've got the
time to get background information that lets me talk to the FAA
attorney and point out the weak spots in his or her case. Sometimes it
works, sometimes it doesn't. But, the FAA now knows that they are not
going to have walkovers all the time because more and more pilots have
paid the pittance charged by the legal services plan and there will be
an attorney involved who knows the system and is going to keep the FAA
attorney honest. I may not be able to get a violation tossed out
(although that happens about 1 time in 20), but I know I'm going to be
able to get the sanction reduced.

Is it worth it? In my humble opinion, the cost is so very little and
the political environment is so biased against pilots that it's foolish
not to pay that very small cost for what amounts to insurance.

No, I'm not being paid by the AOPA for my comments.

So, as one tightwad pilot to anther: get the damn crowbar out, pry
open your wallet, and pay the fee for the legal services plan. If
nothing else, it's like chicken soup, it can't hurt.

All the best,
Rick

> wrote:

<snip>
> So, as one tightwad pilot to anther: get the damn crowbar out, pry
> open your wallet, and pay the fee for the legal services plan. If
> nothing else, it's like chicken soup, it can't hurt.

Although I am already am a member of AOPA's legal service, I still enjoyed
reading your post. Thanks for taking the time to type it up and sharing a
small slice of life on the legal side of aviation in the US. :)

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Rick's post summarizes much of my same thinking on this matter. In
many cases I will happily consult with folks free of charge; but to be
honest, there are traps that are easy to fall into when you do that,
and so attorneys have to be circumspect about the extent to which they
will provide legal advice and guidance to persons who may or may not
end up retaining the attorney.

And, for what it's worth, even though I'm a plan attorney, I'm also a
member. Just in case *I* need a good lawyer.

Blue skies,

Darrell Clay
Cleveland, Ohio
http://ifrpilot.blogspot.com

wrote:
>
> And, for what it's worth, even though I'm a plan attorney, I'm also a
> member. Just in case *I* need a good lawyer.

How's the saying go? "He who serves as his own attorney has a fool for a client."

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

wrote:
>
> So, as one tightwad pilot to anther: get the damn crowbar out, pry
> open your wallet, and pay the fee for the legal services plan.

I'm a charter member. And thanks for the email advice you've given me in the past.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Hey George,

Remember the Adams Family movie where the father announces that the
attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client and then goes
on to say, paraphrased: "As God is my witness, I am that fool!"?

One of the great lines of our time.

BTW, I've mentioned your signature line regarding the Internet to a lot
of people and you've gotten a lot of laughs.

All the best,
Rick

wrote:
>
> BTW, I've mentioned your signature line regarding the Internet to a lot
> of people and you've gotten a lot of laughs.

I'll have to let my brother know. I stole it from him. As an old fisherman, my
version goes "Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
fish and you get rid of him on weekends."

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

I strongly recommend the following firm for legal advice:

http://realtytimes.com/rtcpages/20031016_airport.htm

Many lawyers give a little time to someone with a question without
charge. Those who are a part of the AOPA legal services plan are to be
commended for providing their specialized expertise to we who enjoy
flying. I am a lawyer, too, but do not feel that I have the expertise
to be a provider in the AOPA plan, although I let it be known to our
recetionist that I would like to take the initial call rom a pilot or
aircraft owner, because I can usually at least get them headed in the
right direction or to an aviation specialist.
Many in the rec.aviation newsgroups love to bash lawyers, usually
without any facts or even any experience actually dealing with one.
Many are some of the most prolific posters. We all know who they are.
Too bad they can't say anything good about the good deeds that we in
the legal profession provide.
Have you kissed your lawyer today? ;)

" > wrote:

> Too bad they can't say anything good about the good deeds that we in
> the legal profession provide.

A good lawyer is one who is on your side. A bad lawyer is one who is on the
other side. ;-)



--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On 8 Sep 2005 12:24:09 -0700, " >
wrote in . com>::

>Many lawyers give a little time to someone with a question without
>charge.

My experience has been that the first half hour telephone consultation
is gratis. I thought it was customary.

>Those who are a part of the AOPA legal services plan are to be
>commended for providing their specialized expertise to we who enjoy
>flying.

Specifically commended for what? Are you suggesting that no money
changes hands under the AOPA Legal Services Plan? Certainly the
(non-attorney) plan members have paid an annual fee for their 1/2 hour
consultation. I thought the attorney was also compensated (perhaps at
a reduced rate) by AOPA. Or are you implying the attorney provide his
services at a reduced rate to plan members?

>I am a lawyer, too, but do not feel that I have the expertise
>to be a provider in the AOPA plan, although I let it be known to our
>recetionist that I would like to take the initial call [sic]rom a pilot or
>aircraft owner, because I can usually at least get them headed in the
>right direction or to an aviation specialist.

Exactly what are you saying above, that you are on the AOPA's list of
legal providers, but you lack the expertise to do anything but refer
those who have paid for an initial 1/2 hour consultation to another
attorney who can actually help them?

> Many in the rec.aviation newsgroups love to bash lawyers, usually
>without any facts or even any experience actually dealing with one.

I think lawyer jokes are a common staple of comedians also. (Are you
referring to me.)

>Many are some of the most prolific posters. We all know who they are.

I don't.

>Too bad they can't say anything good about the good deeds that we in
>the legal profession provide.

My only experience with an AOPA attorney was the result of inquiring
about liability exposure associated with the Sky Trail project I am
involved in. The local lawyer was empathetic and eager to help, but
referred me to my insurance provider. That seemed appropriate.

Other experiences with attorneys have ranged from brilliant to
uninformed and ill prepared. It's difficult to generalize about
attornys, with the exception of the often astronomical fees they are
awarded.

That reminds me of a recent credit card bill I received that indicated
a $0.41 credit balance. When I inquired, I was told it was the result
of a class action suit. So I got 41 cents; I wonder what the law
firm's fee was in that case.

On the other hand, I have found the AOPA Legal Services Plan
non-attorney support personnel helpful in the past also.

>Have you kissed your lawyer today? ;)

Not today, but when they are instrumental in winning a case, I'm
appreciative.

Of course, anyone who fails to appreciate that they are instrumental
in their ultimately prevailing in a case by providing their harried
attorney with specific informatin, direction and support is
delusional. An attorney is often an expert tool, as is a physician,
to be employed as necessary. To abandon one's plight entirely is
seldom wise.

Peter R. wrote:
> A good lawyer is one who is on your side. A bad lawyer is one who is on the
> other side. ;-)


Ain't that the truth? I was sued a few years ago in a non-aviation matter. I
followed my lawyer's advice to the "T". My deposition took 55 minutes; the
plaintive's a little over 11 hours. In the end, we didn't pay them dick.
Obviously my lawyer was a genius. Their's would have made more money on that
case had he flipped burgers for McDonald's instead. That's what he got for
taking such a moronic case.

Do I have warm and fuzzy feelings for the guy who fought for me? Of course. <G>

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:08:54 GMT, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
> wrote in
>::

>Peter R. wrote:
>> A good lawyer is one who is on your side. A bad lawyer is one who is on the
>> other side. ;-)
>
>
>Ain't that the truth?

Well, it's half the truth.

It's also important that your lawyer is prepared, knows the law,
understands the mechanics of the court, is willing to take your side
in the matter regardless of how the judge feels about the case, and
most importantly, has sufficient fire in his belly to argue
persuasively. Often attorneys are reluctant to move for dismissal on
technical grounds if it makes the court (or the other attorney) look
incompetent, for they may have to present subsequent cases before them
in the future. You'd be amazed at how much law must be digested
before a winning strategy can be chosen. That requires an experienced
and knowledgeable attorney, as well as copious research (for which you
may be unwilling to pay).

That's why it's important for the client to do as much as possible to
assist the attorney. There's little preventing the client from
visiting the local law library, and reading revenant texts. The
client can also provide his attorney with photographic evidence,
contact expert witnesses, and do other investigative work. In the
case of FAA related matters, the client can make Freedom Of
Information Act (FOIA) requests, and contact regional, district and
local personnel for their contributions, and more.

The client who sits on his hands, and expects his attorney to do it
all, either has very deep pockets or at a substantial disadvantage,
IMO.

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On 8 Sep 2005 12:24:09 -0700, " >
> wrote in . com>::
>
> >Many lawyers give a little time to someone with a question without
> >charge.
>
> My experience has been that the first half hour telephone consultation
> is gratis. I thought it was customary.

It usually is for most. I can't say "all" since some may not.
However it should be, and is by those whom I know.
>
> >Those who are a part of the AOPA legal services plan are to be
> >commended for providing their specialized expertise to we who enjoy
> >flying.
>
> Specifically commended for what? Are you suggesting that no money
> changes hands under the AOPA Legal Services Plan? Certainly the
> (non-attorney) plan members have paid an annual fee for their 1/2 hour
> consultation. I thought the attorney was also compensated (perhaps at
> a reduced rate) by AOPA. Or are you implying the attorney provide his
> services at a reduced rate to plan members?

I don't know what the arrangement is, since I'm not one of the AOPA
legal eagles. My guess is that the fee to the lawyer is nothing or
very, very small. The attorney probably does this on the chance he'll
get an interesting case and a good client. Perhaps one of the
participating lawyers will respond on this point.
>
> >I am a lawyer, too, but do not feel that I have the expertise
> >to be a provider in the AOPA plan, although I let it be known to our
> >recetionist that I would like to take the initial call [sic]rom a pilot or
> >aircraft owner, because I can usually at least get them headed in the
> >right direction or to an aviation specialist.
>
> Exactly what are you saying above, that you are on the AOPA's list of
> legal providers, but you lack the expertise to do anything but refer
> those who have paid for an initial 1/2 hour consultation to another
> attorney who can actually help them?


No, I'm not on the list. As I said, it's not my area of expertise.
Sometimes I just get a cold call at the office. So far the cases I've
taken only involved an employment issue for a flight instructor, a
divorce for one, and the creation of a joint venture between two people
involve in an aircraft deal.
>
> > Many in the rec.aviation newsgroups love to bash lawyers, usually
> >without any facts or even any experience actually dealing with one.
>
> I think lawyer jokes are a common staple of comedians also. (Are you
> referring to me.)

No; I like lawyer jokes.
>
> >Many are some of the most prolific posters. We all know who they are.
>
> I don't.

OK, we don't "all" know who they are. Let's just say that with some
discerning attention to the posts you can probably figure out who I
mean; or search the archives if you care to.
>
> >Too bad they can't say anything good about the good deeds that we in
> >the legal profession provide.
>
> >
> Other experiences with attorneys have ranged from brilliant to
> uninformed and ill prepared.

Agreed.

It's difficult to generalize about attornys, with the exception of the
often astronomical fees they are awarded.

This is a complicated subject. We dont want to spend a lot of time on
it. Suffice it to say most attorneys deserve what they get. But...see
below.
>
> That reminds me of a recent credit card bill I received that indicated
> a $0.41 credit balance. When I inquired, I was told it was the result
> of a class action suit. So I got 41 cents; I wonder what the law
> firm's fee was in that case.

Probably millions. I agree that these are frequently out of hand.
However, if a large company cheats millions of people out of a few
dollars each, and knows that no one person can afford to remedy the
abuse he incurred because of its small size, then the company is
getting away with theft, plain and simple. Only through the method of
class action lawsuits will such abuse be stopped. I have, however,
seen firms settle for much less than their (thousands or millions)of
clients deserve, just to get a quick and lucrative fee. In your case
the settlement might have been fair, or it might have settled for 41
cents when you should have gotten $10. You would have gotten at least
one substantial disclosure and notice of the settlement and its terms
(including the atty fees and costs) before the settlement, and you had
the right to opt out of the settlement if you wished and to pursue your
own case if you wanted-that's the law in all class actions.

FWIW, let me tell you about a class action my firm was involved with.
The large oil companies had contracted with millions of landowners
throughout the US, many of whom were small farms located in the various
states, to pay a royalty of 12 1/2 % of all oil taken from the
landowners' lands. The royalty was set at "the prevailing price for
oil on the spot market." At the time, that was around $30+ per barrel.
The oil companies got together and agreed to sell oil to each other at
$12 per barrel. This is true, I couldn't make this up...they actually
loaded up trains of tankcars and company A sold millions of barrels to
company B for $12 per barrel; then company B sold it back to company A
for $12 per barrel. They loaded the trains and the cars literally just
ran back and forth. We actually discovered letters from company execs
complaining to the others that they were "owed" a return shipment!!
This little game was done by almost all, if not all, the biggies and
some smaller companies. That set "the prevailing price"!! ... Nice
guys. You don't really think the present administration was going to
do any thing about it, do you?


> On the other hand, I have found the AOPA Legal Services Plan
> non-attorney support personnel helpful in the past also.
>
> >Have you kissed your lawyer today? ;)
>
> Not today, but when they are instrumental in winning a case, I'm
> appreciative.

....The landowners were. ;)
>
> Of course, anyone who fails to appreciate that they are instrumental
> in their ultimately prevailing in a case by providing their harried
> attorney with specific informatin, direction and support is
> delusional. An attorney is often an expert tool, as is a physician,
> to be employed as necessary. To abandon one's plight entirely is
> seldom wise.

Thanks for all the replies and info so far.

Honestly I wasn't sure if this was a good idea...or if it was like a
lot of aftermarket "service plans" you can buy for your new
dishwasher/car/etc.

Sounds like a good deal for me.

--Don
Don Byrer
Radar Tech & Smilin' Pilot Guy
Amateur Radio KJ5KB
kj5kb-at-hotmail.com

"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without bending the gear..."

In article >,
Don Byrer > wrote:

> Thanks for all the replies and info so far.
>
> Honestly I wasn't sure if this was a good idea...or if it was like a
> lot of aftermarket "service plans" you can buy for your new
> dishwasher/car/etc.
>
> Sounds like a good deal for me.
>
> --Don
> Don Byrer
> Radar Tech & Smilin' Pilot Guy
> Amateur Radio KJ5KB
> kj5kb-at-hotmail.com
>
> "I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without
> bending the gear..."



And I agree, I'm willing to pay the few dollars a year for the peace of
mind...

--
Chris Schmelzer, MD