Timothy, as pilot-in-command of a Piper Commanche, received information from ATC that he was cleared for take-off. ATC did not provide Timothy with any warning of possible wake turbulence, and it was reasonable to infer that Timothy did not know that a Boeing jet had just departed. By the time Timothy reached the take-off point, the jet was already airborne and was not readily visible to Timothy. The Commanche climbed approximately 150 feet when Timothy lost control, the plane flipped over abruptly, spiraled nose-down, and crashed. Timothy filed a Federal Tort Claims Act lawsuit alleging that the United States was liable for the negligence of ATC in failing to issue a warning of wake turbulence. Timothy has successfully recovered from the United States but has now filed a negligence lawsuit in county court against the individual air traffic controller. You represent the controller. Do you have a motion?
a motion to dismiss because the FTCA allows no double recovery
b motion to dismiss because the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction
c motion to dismiss because the court lacks personal jurisdiction
d motion to change venue
gomanyes
I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding is that Federal Tort Claims Act doesn't provide for suits against individuals, only the federal government itself. I would say A.
Eric H
Timmy must be DEAF not to hear a 707 departing.
And he shouldn't have recovered the first time, since the 707 was faster and the turbulence would have been gone by the time Timmy reached it.
But A is at least partly correct - it's double jepoardy under law, regardless of what the FTCA says.. Additionally, as an employee of the ATC, the controller is not personally responsible under law.
I would move to dismiss on a point of law.
raichasays
Don't know the particulars of federal aviation law, but generally, you cannot recover twice for the same claim/damages, so I'm going with A.
Mr Placid
It's A
Read section 2679
Orignal From: Aviation Law question - very tricky you law geniuses.
Post a Comment