Product Liability Suits Force Shipment Ceasation Of MSA Carburetors Used On Lycoming, Continental and Franklin Engines

I don't want to get in the way of a really good rant, but can we put a
little finer edge on this?

For all the idiotic decisions out there, whether against Cessna, Lycoming,
Parker-Hannefin or even McDonald's, there was some guy on the other side
arguing his heart out saying "My client did nothing wrong, and its product
met all of the applicable legal standards." He was left sputtering and
every bit as outraged as the writers in this thread when the jury came back
awarding millions against his client.

In cases that are settled, the companies pay because they have a damned good
idea of what a jury is going to do if it watches the grieving widow or
listens to the burn victim describe his treatment, regardless of how
well-made or well-engineered their products were.

There are *some* lawyers who manipulate gullible and sympathetic juries to
the detriment of society, especially general aviation. The system,
including the trial process, legislatures (i.e. lawyers who write laws) and
the judiciary (i.e. former lawyers who think they are little legislatures)
has become malignant, destroying the body that gave it life. But like a
malignancy, there is the rest of the body -- lots of decent, hard-working,
intelligent and right-minded people who are trying like hell to stop the
spread of the disease.

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Richard wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Matt Whiting wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:
Yes, and the more they make the more they will come up with these
schemes. I don't think it will end until the lawyers have all of the
money and then have to sue each other. :-)

Matt
They're already doing that. :-)

Here's how to deal with lawyers.

http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited...fx4298368.html

"Pakistani police Monday baton-charged and arrested more than 100
lawyers at protests in at least two cities against a state of emergency
imposed by President Pervez Musharraf, witnesses said."
Unfortunately, after years of neglect, apathy, and unbridled greed on the
part of the American public, the control lawyers now enjoy over every
facet of American life, business, and government, is complete.
We are now simply waiting for the inevitable downfall of such a system.

And the lawyers will sue everyone for causing said downfall.

"LWG" wrote in
:

I don't want to get in the way of a really good rant, but can we put a
little finer edge on this?

For all the idiotic decisions out there, whether against Cessna,
Lycoming, Parker-Hannefin or even McDonald's, there was some guy on
the other side arguing his heart out saying "My client did nothing
wrong, and its product met all of the applicable legal standards." He
was left sputtering and every bit as outraged as the writers in this
thread when the jury came back awarding millions against his client.

In cases that are settled, the companies pay because they have a
damned good idea of what a jury is going to do if it watches the
grieving widow or listens to the burn victim describe his treatment,
regardless of how well-made or well-engineered their products were.

There are *some* lawyers who manipulate gullible and sympathetic
juries to the detriment of society, especially general aviation. The
system, including the trial process, legislatures (i.e. lawyers who
write laws) and the judiciary (i.e. former lawyers who think they are
little legislatures) has become malignant, destroying the body that
gave it life. But like a malignancy, there is the rest of the body --
lots of decent, hard-working, intelligent and right-minded people who
are trying like hell to stop the spread of the disease.

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury already
feels toward a badly injured victim.

Many years ago I was on a jury where an oversized passenger refused to
wear a seatbelt on a commuter flight. At first the Captain told her to
leave the aircraft and called the police to remove her. When the police
arrived, she agreed to wear the seatbelt and promised to obey the Captain's
instructions. They let her stay. Other passengers testified that during
the take off roll, she removed the seat belt and bragged to them that the
Captain didn't know what he was talking about, seat belts weren't
necessary. Near their destination, the Captain informed all passengers
that there was expected moderate to severs turbulence and asked everyone to
ensure their seatbelts were tightly fastened. The other passengers
testified that they pleaded with this passenger to put on the seatbelt, but
she refused. The aircraft hit severe turbulence. She was thrown into the
air and crashed to the floor of the aircraft, breaking two ribs, an arm, a
leg, and also had a skull fracture. Of course she sued the airline. The
forelady of the jury wanted to give her much more than the suit was for
becase "It's only an insurance companies money." I don't know what
eventually happened, as it ended in a hung jury. One other juror and
myself refused to give her a penny. We felt sorry for her for the injuries
she had suffered and the medical bills she incurred, but she did it to
herself.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:37:32 +0000, Marty Shapiro wrote:

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury already
feels toward a badly injured victim.

I agree. I'm far more inclined to blame juries than lawyers. Lawyers
are just doing their job of advocating for their client. It's not their
fault that juries have twisted this around so badly.

Yes, the advocates argue for ridiculous awards. But that's what you'd
expect an advocate to do: request the most possible for the client. The
juries are supposed to impose sanity on the system.

And at that they've failed miserably.

Dudley argued earlier in this thread that this wasn't just an aviation
problem. That's true. But politicians score points by [claiming to be]
trying to fix things like health care costs. We in aviation don't make
as juicy a political demographic.

- Andrew

On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 19:32:24 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gideon
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:37:32 +0000, Marty Shapiro wrote:

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury already
feels toward a badly injured victim.

I agree. I'm far more inclined to blame juries than lawyers. Lawyers
are just doing their job of advocating for their client. It's not their
fault that juries have twisted this around so badly.

Yes, the advocates argue for ridiculous awards. But that's what you'd
expect an advocate to do: request the most possible for the client. The
juries are supposed to impose sanity on the system.

And at that they've failed miserably.

Dudley argued earlier in this thread that this wasn't just an aviation
problem. That's true. But politicians score points by [claiming to be]
trying to fix things like health care costs. We in aviation don't make
as juicy a political demographic.

- Andrew


I'll tag this on the end of this thread.

What I would llike to see is have the rules (laws) changed and if
somone sues and looses, they would have to pay the one sued the amount
sued for and the lawyer would have to match that amount.

This might help get some sanity back in the system???

Big John

Big John wrote in
:



I'll tag this on the end of this thread.

What I would llike to see is have the rules (laws) changed and if
somone sues and looses, they would have to pay the one sued the amount
sued for and the lawyer would have to match that amount.

This might help get some sanity back in the system???

Well, I got sued and won and the other ******* had to pay my lawyer and it
was a LOT of money. IIRC he was suing me for about three grand and he won,
then I appealed, he lost and had to pay lawyers fees on my side alone of
over eight grand and probably almost as much ot his guy.


God that was great.


Bertie

Big John wrote in
:

On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 19:32:24 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gideon
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:37:32 +0000, Marty Shapiro wrote:

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury already
feels toward a badly injured victim.

I agree. I'm far more inclined to blame juries than lawyers. Lawyers
are just doing their job of advocating for their client. It's not their
fault that juries have twisted this around so badly.

Yes, the advocates argue for ridiculous awards. But that's what you'd
expect an advocate to do: request the most possible for the client. The
juries are supposed to impose sanity on the system.

And at that they've failed miserably.

Dudley argued earlier in this thread that this wasn't just an aviation
problem. That's true. But politicians score points by [claiming to be]
trying to fix things like health care costs. We in aviation don't make
as juicy a political demographic.

- Andrew


I'll tag this on the end of this thread.

What I would llike to see is have the rules (laws) changed and if
somone sues and looses, they would have to pay the one sued the amount
sued for and the lawyer would have to match that amount.

This might help get some sanity back in the system???

Big John

It would if we had juries that decided on facts and the law not
emotion and "it's only an insurance companies money". As long as juries
decide cases on that basis, your better off at the crap tables. At least
there you know what your odds really are.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Marty Shapiro wrote:
Big John wrote in
:

On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 19:32:24 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gideon
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:37:32 +0000, Marty Shapiro wrote:

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury already
feels toward a badly injured victim.
I agree. I'm far more inclined to blame juries than lawyers. Lawyers
are just doing their job of advocating for their client. It's not their
fault that juries have twisted this around so badly.

Yes, the advocates argue for ridiculous awards. But that's what you'd
expect an advocate to do: request the most possible for the client. The
juries are supposed to impose sanity on the system.

And at that they've failed miserably.

Dudley argued earlier in this thread that this wasn't just an aviation
problem. That's true. But politicians score points by [claiming to be]
trying to fix things like health care costs. We in aviation don't make
as juicy a political demographic.

- Andrew

I'll tag this on the end of this thread.

What I would llike to see is have the rules (laws) changed and if
somone sues and looses, they would have to pay the one sued the amount
sued for and the lawyer would have to match that amount.

This might help get some sanity back in the system???

Big John

It would if we had juries that decided on facts and the law not
emotion and "it's only an insurance companies money". As long as juries
decide cases on that basis, your better off at the crap tables. At least
there you know what your odds really are.


Yes, when your education system falls apart and your populace is no long
smart enough to understand basic economics, this is what happens. Throw
in a "justice" system that really is about money rather than justice and
the cycle is complete.

Matt

Recently, Andrew Gideon posted:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:37:32 +0000, Marty Shapiro wrote:

You left out the attitude of some jurors who say "It's only the
insurance companies money." That adds to the sympathy the jury
already feels toward a badly injured victim.

I agree. I'm far more inclined to blame juries than lawyers. Lawyers
are just doing their job of advocating for their client. It's not
their fault that juries have twisted this around so badly.

What is the impact of those that dodge jury duty?

What is the impact of the jury selection process, where lawyers "weed out"
the remaining jurors capable of understanding their twisted logic?

The whole system needs to be revamped if you want it to work as originally
intended.

The Pakistani's had a good thing going the other day; it gave me a big
chuckle to watch the lawyers being dragged off to jail. I'm just not sure
they could keep that up for long enough to have a positive impact on
society. Of course, we're not quite up to that level of consciousness yet.
;-)

Neil

You can do more. It is important that you contact your congressman
today - www.AeroBlue.Org/TortReform

Describe the damage that these suits have on our industry. This
action will affect 152,000 $15B worth of aircraft.

We need to extend the General Aviation Revitalization Act to protect
certified manufacturers, parts and service.

There are increasing numbers of mechanics who will not, can not repair
aircraft over 18 years old, because this liability has shifted to the
mechanic and the part.


AeroBlue.Org - The Grassroots Aviation Network