Letters to the Editor display some of the range and diversity of Greater Phoenix Mensa (GPM) and are intended to provoke thought. Opinions are the writers' property and not necessarily supported by Mensa or its members.
I wanted to respond to the articles in the May, 1995 MAAM (okay, I'm a little behind in my reading) by George Iliff (Lawyers, Again) and Timothy Forshey (In Defense of the Legal Profession), as both have invited, but I could not find either's address printed in the issue. Perhaps you could forward this to them.
I have to come down firmly on Mr. Iliff's side in this issue. He makes many good points that need not be repeated here, but the two that hit closest to home for me are the state of the general aviation industry and the Great McDonald's Coffee Fiasco.
In the coffee fiasco we have a situation wherein one person has deprived everyone else of something they want, namely, coffee that is extremely hot. Mr. Forshey makes the argument himself by saying that McDonald's coffee is "far hotter that the industry standard, and far more likely to cause injury, simply because it improves taste and increases sales" (emphasis mine)
People like it better. That's why it increases sales. They want it to be hot. The purchaser is the one responsible for its safe handling after purchase. The woman's severe injuries are unfortunate, but irrelevant. If I walk off a cliff, it isn't Reebok's fault, no matter how badly I am injured or how poor my medical insurance is.
Mr. Forshey states "Remember, the plaintiff was not injured because she spilled her coffee. She was injured because the coffee she did spill was dangerously, and wrongly, too damned hot." By this flawed logic, every car should have a limiter preventing it from exceeding five miles per hour (because it is dangerously fast otherwise), every firearm should be without a firing pin (to make it safe), every electrical outlet should limited to five volts and less than one amp (because electricity is dangerous), television networks should only be allowed to broadcast for four hours per day (too much television is dangerous), etc. Everything can be dangerous. The manufacturer of a product cannot baby-sit every purchaser. The user of a product must be held responsible for the safe use of that product or we will destroy every last semblance of American industry (and we're already well underway).
With regards to small aircraft manufacturers Mr. Forshey states "if juries rendered verdicts which put those companies out of business, I, for one, can only say good riddance. I would certainly not avail myself of the opportunity to fly on an aircraft manufactured by such a company if their mistakes had resulted in prior deaths."
Juries are supposed to be composed of the peers of the accused. They generally are not. A group of twelve people off the street know nothing about the safety of a highly complex machine like an airplane. They respond to the emotional theatrics of the attorneys, not the facts of the case.
A recent case that rocked the entire general aviation industry is typical. A pilot got a job flying a cameraman for some air to air photography. The pilot operated his airplane out of a privately owned airport. The owner of the airport felt that the pilot in question was not a safe pilot and withdrew permission for him to use the airport. The pilot ignored this and began preparations for the flight anyway. The owner of the airport, in what can only be described as one of the top ten bone-headed maneuvers of the year, decided that the way to prevent the pilot from taking off was to park his van on the runway.
Meanwhile, the pilot began loading equipment into his 1940's vintage Piper Cub. The Cub has been the quintessential light plane to most Americans since its introduction. It is a two-seat (one in front of the other) high-wing, tailwheel airplane, which means that while sitting on the ground the nose is pointed into the air, somewhat limiting forward visibility. Nearly every airplane built between the early 1900s and the end of World War II was a "taildragger," including such famous ones as the B-17 Flying Fortress and the venerable DC-3. Tens of thousands of these aircraft have been operating safely for 80 years.
Since it is standard procedure to fly the Cub from the back seat, the pilot proceeded to load a large movie camera into the front seat of the Cub which completely blocked forward visibility (another candidate for top ten bone-head of the year). He then boarded the camera operator forward of the camera facing backwards (there is no provision in the plane for such an arrangement) and climbed in himself.
It should be obvious to the reader by now what happened. The plane slammed into the van parked on the runway causing the pilot's head to impact the camera resulting in serious injuries.
The pilot sued Piper Aircraft. His claim was that the Cub, by virtue of being a tailwheel airplane, is inherently unsafe due to the limited forward visibility on the ground. For the first time ever, the FAA filed a brief with the court stating that the FAA alone can determine the airworthiness of an airplane and that the court had no jurisdiction to make such a determination. Piper's attorneys pointed out that under Federal law the Pilot In Command of an aircraft is responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft.
The fact that the pilot illegally installed equipment not FAA approved for the aircraft was ignored. The fact that the camera installation and the improper seating arrangement of the camera operator was the true cause of the visibility problem was ignored. The fact that the airport operator violated Federal law by endangering the safety of an aircraft was ignored. The court found Piper Aircraft at fault for producing an aircraft over 40 years ago that had inadequate visibility over the nose.
A true jury of his peers, composed of pilots, mechanics, even aviation attorneys, or anyone who understands the industry and the legal requirements for operating within it, would have laughed the guy right out of the courtroom. A knowledgeable judge should have thrown the case out before even bothering those nice people that came down to be the jury.
The problem is, this kind of thing is destroying the industry. This was not a case of clear negligence on the part of the manufacturer. This is not a case of a new product being introduced that might have a design defect. This is a case of two complete idiots blaming an innocent third party and winning. I had the opportunity to speak with the lawyer representing the pilot and he said "don't you think that the victim should be compensated?" Only an idiot wouldn't realize that Piper Aircraft was the victim.
A few years ago Beechcraft spent millions of dollars in a single year defending themselves from lawsuits. By Mr. Forshey's definition, they were all frivolous, because Beech did not lose a single suit that year. The effects on the industry, on the other hand, were devastating.
Cessna estimated, a few years ago, that liability insurance premiums doubled the cost of a new light plane. That was right before they stopped building them. And they haven't built any single engine planes in over seven years. As a result the average age of the general aviation fleet is over 20 years. Is this in the interests of safety?
Cessna, Piper, Beech and Mooney are the largest, safest, most respected names in general aviation in the world, and yet they cannot compete with companies from outside the US due to product liability costs. Mooney has been somewhat successful by taking a different approach than the others. Mooney carries no liability insurance at all. Their philosophy is "Sue us and you are the new owner."
My message is not that all lawyers are scum. I am working right now with an attorney in Denver on the probate of my father's estate. He has been friendly, efficient, relatively inexpensive (by today's standards), and very helpful. My message is that product consumers must be held responsible for their actions.
Yes, occasionally we come across a case where a manufacturer was clearly negligent, but far too often a case is brought with no merit that is settled out of court just to save publicity or dollars, or goes to a jury of people who are not qualified to make a determination of liability and they side for the "little guy" without understanding the issues involved.
The legal precedents that have been set over the last few decades will be our undoing. Law suits have become the get-rich-quick scheme of the '80s and '90s as the few become rich at the expense of the many. Around the world our liability situation is the laughing stock of first world nations. Lawyers advertise now to find people and encourage them to sue, "Have you ever had a (fill in the blank: breast implant, auto accident, etc.)? Call us and we'll protect your legal rights."
We all pay for this foolishness, in the form of high product costs, lost jobs, and lost competitive ability on the global markets. It is time we once again take the responsibility that goes along with what freedom we have left.
Try enhance! What does inhance mean, if it is a word!
Get in touch with Mr. Motta again!
Thanks for your enput - Ed.
Help Needed: Mensa Entrepreneur with Internet Access
I am interested in an Internet marketing experiment through our RV resort in Quartzsite, Arizona. We are making available a vacation club concept providing inexpensive recreational vehicle ways of traveling.
We need people with Internet capacity to make the memberships available on the Internet. We do not have access to such in Quartzsite with only a small rural phone company.
If you have Internet capabilities and are interested we very much want to talk to you and provide detailed information on how this vacation club works so you can make it available with your Internet access and capability.
Our vacation club, affiliated with 400 other RV resorts, provides literally free travel for RV users, along with discounts on condos, timeshares, and rental units throughout the US. and the world.
If this has some appeal to you and you have the Internet capability please contact us:
Ed Hohn
Rocking H Resort
P.O. Box 2806
Quartszite, AZ., 85346
(520) 927-8139