Jackson Jambalaya

Watkins & Eager should be ashamed. This is horrible to continue to fumble

Thanks for reminding us all that lawyers are grifter scum. I don’t care about that one good lawyer you have in your family.

The pilot in command is in fact in command, but pilots tend to blindly follow clearances given by ATC (air traffic "control").

I am not blaming these folks as they can't defend themselves, but for you pilots, don't be sheep and blindly follow instructions/clearances from ATC. You are IN COMMAND!

ATC can screw up and ruin your day while they are safely in an air conditioned control room.

ATPL issued by 3 countries
CFI
Flown to 50 countries

Richie Swartz would have settled their case against the FAA for $25,000 well before the statute ran.

Reminder than an AI attorney wouldn’t have done this. And AI can do the job better than all but the most brilliant top attorneys.

The FAA ruled the crash cause as.....??????
On the surface, it would appear the pulot ran out of fuel.
There is an old adage amount aviators:
Observe thy fuel leve, lest thr Earh rise up and smite thee!

Legal malpractice cases are a pesky breed in MS.

To be successful the plaintiff suing the lawyer typically has to prove that had the defendant lawyer filed the suit timely that the plaintiff would have succeeded. So defense lawyers in such legal malpractice cases can have a field day requiring a “trial within a trial.” In olden days the plaintiff had to prove not only that he could win the underlying suit but that he could collect from the defendant. The rules have eased some but it’s a perilous course for the plaintiff nonetheless.

If you want to know more about these type actions find Bob Germany before lunch ensues and get him to elaborate on missing a statute of limitations in a med mal case in Starkville and his decade long debacle. Fascinating case and extremely beneficial / applicable in this case Louis.

The key take aways for me?

- the dentists didn’t have enough life insurance in force;
- never fly in old private planes nicknamed “doctor killers” if you/ pilot are doctors.

* the surviving family members in this matter coalesced around the children and have truly done a remarkable job.

Having worked in air traffic control while in the service it seems they should have sent them to the closest airport 9 miles away. Was it at night and did the closer airport have lights ?

I'll check when I get home but I'm pretty sure it was daylight

Surviving family members didn't file any lawsuits against any other parties other than the FAA?

Specifically were the folks who manufactured, maintained,inspected and fueled the plane not sued? For some reason?

Oh.

"Probable Cause and Findings
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
A total loss of power in both engines due to fuel starvation as a result of the pilot's fuel
mismanagement, and his subsequent failure to follow the emergency checklist. Contributing to
the pilot's failure to follow the emergency checklist was his lack of emergency procedures
training in the accident airplane."



file:///C:/Users/user/AppData/Local/Temp/Report_DCA19LA070_98914_8_20_2021 4 14 05 PM.pdf

Impact occurred about 11:15 am.

@ 2:10 what's the likelihood of 2 fuel pumps going out? The resulting fire after the crash would lead one to think there was plenty of fuel onboard.

@3:19 says "fuel starvation as a result of the pilot's fuel mismanagement." I have heard that the pilot didn't switch over to the other tanks (which had fuel). That would match with that statement. But I honestly don't know.

Hold that thought @4:05 this is a big hot mess!

Come on KF post those comments!

" but for you pilots, don't be sheep and blindly follow instructions/clearances from ATC. You are IN COMMAND!
ATC can screw up and ruin your day while they are safely in an air conditioned control room."

I have a pilot friend say roughly the same thing. He says, if one finds themselves in an extreme emergency.

1. Aviate (fly the plane as best you can)
2. Navigate (look for any suitable landing area)
3. Communicate (worry about talking to the ATC's after safely
landing the plane)

These lessons he learned in flight school.

I'm not knocking any Air Traffic Controller. I admire them all.
The vast majority are great professionals

But with any group, there will always be a bad one in the mix.

No doubt W&E screwed the pooch on this one, but plenty of doubt as to whether there was cause for claim against FAA.

First, the pilot was given the choice of which airport to proceed to and evidently he chose Tuscalousa. Second, the FAA gave (according to the plantiff's lawsuit - would have to see what the actual recording shows to know if it is accurate) an estimated distance to the two airports. While it was the pilot's choice, he also had instruments available to tell him the distance to the two airports. And, losing his altitude when 'told' to decend to 6000 was also up to him; plenty of times when given that kind of instruction I have questioned the controller and suggested maintaining for xyz reason. If pilot was concerned about glide slope, he could have easily raised that question to controller.

Now the question also exists - why did the fuel pump(s?) fail? What was the condition of the pumps and what fuel management issues existed? If the fault of the failure created the emergency then why (except that lawyers always want to find fault --- contingencies, you know) was it the ATC that was responsible for the horrible loss of life that occurred.

And, BTW KF FWIW, the FAA didn't make any findings as to the cause of the accident - that job is done by the NTSB.

"Were the folks who manufactured, maintained,inspected and fueled the plane not sued? For some reason?"

Why sue the people who made and maintained the plane? Seems like it was running perfectly until Dr Knowitall ran it out of fuel and then panicked and forgot to switch tanks.

You sound like an ambulance chasing dirt ball.

@3:40 PM the likelihood of two fuel pumps failing is pretty slim. A fuel fire after impact is strong evidence that there was fuel on board.

After 55 years as a pilot, it is very clear to me that educated professionals (doctors, lawyers, dentists) are too focused on their profession and don't put enough focus and training on their flying skills, because they are professionals, right?

I have lost two close lawyer friends and a physician in airplane accidents over the years; accidents that were pilot error and very preventable. The machine did not fail.

Aviation accidents often follow a chain of events. The chain may be broken at any time and there will be no accident. That chain can be broken by proper fuel management, or not flying into adverse weather, etc.

The FAA controller did not cause the accident, but he could possibly have broken the chain by sending them to the closer airport.

In years past doctors and lawyers would often buy the legacy V-tailed Beechcraft Bonanza. They were cynically called "doctor-lawyer killers." The two lawyers and one physician that I mentioned above were killed in Beechcraft Bonanzas.

RIP all.

Why do they design a plane that has to manually switch fuel tanks? Why purposely design a failure point into your plane? How about "if tank A runs low, automatically switch to tank B."

Wait until KF posts the rest of the 411 on what really happened.
\
Also comment at 3:11 was a rhetorical question, the reason not to sue any others is obvious when all the rest of facts are examined.

Shocked the pilot without an active license didn't get some jail time for all the lives he risked other than the six on board who died.

Also don't ride with doctor or a lawyer as a pilot unless you are damn sure they are both competent and current on their certs and training, not to mention a capable pilot. Your life and your loved ones are at risk.

Also note that after running out of fuel and not switching tanks that with both engines out the pilot did not feather either prop and impacted short of runway.

If you can't afford to hire professional pilots to fly your plane, then sell the plane and fly commercial. Besides, the real fun in flying private is being in the back of the plane.

Largest legal malpractice verdict in U.S. history versus largest law firm in the world in Jones County, MS. The Hon. Mark Nelson, Hattiesburg, MS for the plaintiff.

@4:38 When some uninsured moron crawls to his car after leaving the M-Bar and takes out your family, handle it yourself big guy,

Page 95 of documents. Letter from FAA. First paragraph, sentence beginning with "However..."

Good luck Louis.

"After 55 years as a pilot, it is very clear to me that educated professionals (doctors, lawyers, dentists) are too focused on their profession and don't put enough focus and training on their flying skills, because they are professionals, right?"

As an "educated professional" of nearly 50 years, the above is a very succinct and accurate statement that young "educated professionals" (whose profession isn't "pilot") should heed. I too have known folks who should have known better and were lost to the exact same "V-tail doctor killer." Young doctors and lawyers, I'm giving you some free advice and I guarantee you it is worth more than you are paying for it. Life often isn't about what you really do know, the easy things that you actually do know flat-out certain in your sleep, it's about the things that you foolishly tell yourself that (you think) you know but do not. Or really, recognizing and admitting the stark difference. The most important part of being truly educated is learning how much you don't know. And acting accordingly. That said, we fly quite often...Delta has always been (mostly) ready when we were. I've met and known a number of professional pilots (civ and mil) and I've never had a single one tell me they were a doctor or lawyer on the side.

End of sermon, vaya con Dios.

Even good pilots die, John Denver, JFK Jr. every death requires some deep pockets to pay up? Legal malpractice is the topic, yes it really occurs.

The level of arrogance in some of these posts is astonishing. Thanks for the sage advice oh ye wise men who know all.

6:14, John Denver, JFK, Jr.?

I don't think you made the point you were hoping for.

JFK Jr was not a good pilot. He wasn’t type rated in the plane he flew, flew into IMC weather without training, and flew against his flight instructors advice… while in a cast.

That’s not a good pilot.

John Denver was flying with a suspended license, flying a homemade experimental plane with little training and also ran out of fuel. I would use the term "good pilot" loosely.

Could bad fuel have caused the fuel pumps to fail? I have no idea, but I am aware that bad fuel has caused planes to crash in the past.

Hard to tell which is the larger disaster here; whether it is the senseless loss of life of 6 fine people, 4 of whom were dentists, or the misinformation and attempts to make some financial reward. Of course it is the former but the latter should not be dismissed; it reflects today's society.

Several things seem very clear:
1. The Navajo did not run out of fuel as it burned after crashing. The liklihood of both fuel pumps failing in sequence is much less than being eaten by a shark while being struck by lightening.
The entirely preventable emergency was mishandled; again a reflection of inexperience. The props were not feathered and the airplane descended at a much greater speed than best glide speed; a critical difference. I heard or read somewhere that this pilot had less than 50 hours in type-the figure insurance companies demand before allowing the carrying of passengers and being insured.

The Navajo made it to Florida without refueling; the trip back should have been the same. There were no vicious headwinds to cause fuel exhaustion.
Airplane design covers a lot; fuel tanks placed where thy can be (Lindberg had to deal with what? seven different tanks, and it involved a a lot of switching to avoid engine starvation); the idea of an automatic switch to detect low tank content and change tanks is ludicrous when one considers the fallability of such an arrangement. Fuel management is a basic workload for the pilot.

2. The pilot was an entheusiastic though relatively inexperienced pilot. One of the problems with professions that earn more money than most is that those professionals can often afford things that have a sharp potential and a tendency to bite if mishandled. This applies to doctors, denntists, and those few good lawyers as well as others. JFK jr. proved two things in his evening flight to Cape Cod: he couldn't fly and he couldn't swim. Reports that bill klinton was proud of him because he took two women down with him are probably untrue.

If any of this comment or pilot humor (often a bit dark and edgy) offends any of the gentle readers here, I do not apologize.

8:46: After the accident the aircraft’s fuel selector were found set to pull fuel from the outboard wing tanks. Those tanks only hold enough fuel for about one hour and forty-five minutes of flight. The aircraft started losing power about that same amount of time into the accident flight. The standard pre-flight inspection by the pilot in command includes drawing a little fuel from under-wing sumps to check for water in the fuel. Even if there had been water in the outboard tanks switching to the inboard tanks might have helped.

Something no one has mentioned, so I will. Assuming the claim(s) were not frivolous (and W & E must have felt they were not since they took the case and filed one or more of them), the Plaintiffs were entitled to their day (well, several years) in court. I'm sure the defense would have pointed out to the finder of fact (the jury or the judge) a lot of the specifics related to the crash.

I would suggest that while the possible failure of one professional - a dentist - to act appropriately while doing something not related to his profession is important, it was the indisputable failure of other professionals - W & E - to act appropriately while doing something that is - precisely - related to their profession, that is at the heart of this lawsuit. I would further suggest that the next layer of the onion is another set of professionals - the air traffic controllers - allegedly failing to act appropriately while doing something - precisely - related to their profession. In both latter cases, that is an acceptable definition of "malpractice." None of the above is meant to suggest absolution of all responsibility for the dentist's possible failure(s), it is meant to suggest putting the appropriate focus on all and each of the appropriate parties' duties and failures, some alleged and at least one indisputable.

The way I understand it, in a Navaho the low fuel pressure light comes on when the tank runs dry. This should prompt you to switch tanks, but maybe the pilot misconstrued the light as meaning the fuel pump failed. Then the same thing happened on the other side. The FIRST step after an engine begins sputtering is to change tanks and switch on the aux fuel pump. I believe the plane was fairly new to him so maybe there was a lack of training?

JFK did not have to be type-rated to fly a Saratoga. However, he was not instrument rated and flew into instrument conditions. Became upside down without realizing it.

I grew up with Angie in Cleveland. We belonged to the same church. Her mother was one of the sweetest people you would ever meet. Angie’s mother moved to Oxford after her retirement. I haven’t seen her in several years.

All this scholarly, bullshit advice from the wealthy, aside, what are the chances a plane has two fuel pumps fail and the plane is suddenly absent fuel at the same time? I would guess...impossible. I trust FAA investigations about like I trust Pentagon reports.

And, yes, 'Mississippi's attorney" (according to billboards), Richie Schwartz, would have quickly settled this whole thing for $130,000.

Am I correct in recalling that one of the deceased was a family member of Murray Roark, former Golden Gloves Champ and Constable in Bolivar County, MS. A sure tragedy for all families involved.

Easy to “Monday morning quarterback” this one. As usual So many mistakes that compounds to a disaster. Any one can keep a 747 in the air with a few hours of training when everything is perfect. When the systems fail and immediate action is necessary, a cool head is required. You only get this through hundreds of hours in the simulator and thousands of hours in the air. Doctors or anyone that’s not an ATP just don’t have this kind of experience. ATC should have been more on top of the situation , but it always falls back on the left seat. Wether it was a systems failure(doubtful) or fuel mismanagement, it’s a shame they did not walk away. An open field or even mushing into the tree tops at just above v stall and you have a couple broken bones at worst.

The errors and omissions carrier for W & E will tender the policy limits without much fuss. . . My prediction.

"Reports that bill klinton was proud of him because he took two women down with him are probably untrue. If any of this comment or pilot humor (often a bit dark and edgy) offends any of the gentle readers here, I do not apologize."

I've been patiently waiting for Mississippi State's Mike Leach to find this Blog. Clowns to the left of me, Clowns to the right.

Was the pilot’s estate sued for wrongful death?
Did any of the Farese or Perry children receive any settlement/agreement other than life insurance?
Were any of the other owners of the plane sued?

"Was the pilot’s estate sued for wrongful death?
Did any of the Farese or Perry children receive any settlement/agreement other than life insurance?
Were any of the other owners of the plane sued?"

A couple of points: these types of planes are often owned by "aviation entities" like LLCs, even if the "owner" is a corp and high-income people (and those with high-value assets) often have trusts that own the bulk of the assets to which the person/couple have access, liability shielding being among the reasons in both cases. The pilot's estate may not have had any substantive assets to settle or get a collectable judgment against. In any case, if there were settlements with the estate, insurance companies, ownership entities, etc., no lawsuits would or could have been filed by or against settling parties. I'd also guess that any settlement(s) would have confidentiality clauses and wouldn't be public record at least at this point in the proceedings.

@4:45 It didn't take long for a football obsessed redneck to enter the room. Since Leach is a lawyer, he might have something uniquely relevant to lend to the conversation. That said, clown, look in the mirror.

1234 listen up. W&E is a sound law firm, chock full of every competent attorneys. Your prediction is stupid and shows how little you know about the real world of litigation. Louis and his gang better get ready to rumble. If the facts bear out a conclusion that W&E is liable, they and their insurance co will step up to resolve the case. THIS ONE WILL RESOLVE AFTER ALL THE FACTS ARE KNOWN AND NOT BEFORE.

@10:59 a.m. - The reason I mentioned Leach is that the poster's attempt at dark humor sounds like his repertoire. Has nothing to do with football or rednecks. Roll your white socks down to the top of your Bass Weejuns and KMA.

As for the malpractice insurer rolling over u have not practiced law . The carrier has an excellent chance of successfully denying the claim due to W&E failure to inform the client that the statute had run. Their failure to appeal the adverse ruling as to their intervention claim could also be grounds for a denial

Unfortunately, several instances of pilot error created a chain of events which ended in disaster. Quite a reach to blame someone else.

I read the entire incident report years ago.
I recall it being clear cut pilot error concerning fuel management.
I'm a pilot.

but yes...everyone sues.
It's always someone else's fault. yep.
Terrible tragedy - no doubt. Pilot error nevertheless. 100%.

Kingfish's original post is about Watkins & Eager's negligence, not the pilot's negligence or Air Traffic Control's negligence. We all understand that the pilot and ATC's acts and omissions will come into play in hashing out the malpractice action, but W&E clearly failed their clients. Now, instead of arguing the merits of their clients' claims, W&E will be arguing why their clients were never entitled to a recovery on their claims against ATC et al. [THAT is not what any lawyer wants to have to do.] But be assured, W&E was initially giddy to land such a high profile case with a potentially huge contingent fee to be made. They absolutely blew it, and they know it, and, if they are honest, they are absolutely sick about it. If they are decent, they are more sickened by what they have done to their client than merely that they lost a big fee.