When you are faced with legal issues arising out of a mass transit accident, such as a train collision, an attorney who has regularly advised and represented clients in such matters can help you achieve a timely resolution. To learn more about our legal services, contact the firm to schedule a consultation and case evaluation with an experienced attorney.
Thank you for contacting Clancy Law. Your message has been sent.
Call us now
or use the form below.
Defective Airplanes and Parts
Although pilot error is a common cause of aircraft accidents, defects in the aircraft or its component parts may contribute to the accident or the severity of injuries suffered. In such cases, the manufacturer of the aircraft, or the manufacturer of a component part, may share the blame with pilots for the crash or for the injuries the accident caused. For example, if the plane's breaks fail during landing and the plane skids off the runway and crashes, the manufacturer of the breaks may be liable for any resulting injuries. An attorney with experience in aviation accident and product liability cases at Clancy Law in Saint Charles, IL can evaluate your situation and help you determine how best to proceed.
Product Liability
Under the basic principles applicable in product liability cases, a plaintiff who was injured because of defects in or the design of an airplane or component part can hold manufacturers or sellers of aircraft or aircraft parts liable for his or her injuries. Liability can be based on negligence, breach of warranty or strict liability theories. To prevail, the plaintiff must show that the aircraft or part was actually defective, improperly designed or that the manufacturer was otherwise at fault; that the defendant actually manufactured, sold or installed the part or aircraft; and that the defendant's act or omission proximately caused the plaintiff's injury.
Negligence
To establish a product liability case based on negligence, the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty; that the defendant breached that duty; that the breach was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries; and damages. Generally, a manufacturer of aircraft or aircraft parts has a duty of ordinary, reasonable care. Whether a defendant has breached that duty is determined by comparing the defendant's conduct to how an ordinarily prudent manufacturer of airplanes would have acted.
Strict Liability
The doctrine of strict product liability makes it easier to sue manufacturers in product defect cases by switching the focus to the safety of the product rather than the conduct of the person using the product. Unlike litigation against a pilot or operator, a strict liability claim against a manufacturer does not require proof that negligence caused the accident. To establish a strict liability claim, the plaintiff must prove the defendant's relationship to the product, the defective or unreasonably dangerous condition of the product and that the condition was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. In proving that the product was unreasonably dangerous, the fact that an aircraft or part complies with FAA design standards is relevant, but not conclusive.
Conclusion
Manufacturers of defective airplanes and component parts can be held liable for any injuries caused by those defects under a product liability theory. If you were injured in an aviation accident and you suspect a defective product is to blame, talk to a lawyer at Clancy Law in Saint Charles, IL who has experience in product liability litigation.
Copyright © 2011 FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business
DISCLAIMER: This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek competent legal counsel for advice on any legal matter.
