ChileRelleno 0 #1 January 7, 2004 Skydiving, January 2004 issue, top of pg.26 Quote"Tennessee Parachute Company Hit with $53.6 Million Judgement" A Georgia skydiver recently won a $53.57 million judgment against the company that built his reserve canopy. James Rubio of Atlanta was badly hurt in November 2001 when his Precision Aerodynamics Raven Dash M 181 reserve malfunctioned (SKYDIVING #247). Rubio deployed his reserve into a pilot chute in tow malfunction. The canopy suffered torn panels and ten broken suspension lines after an "instant canopy" deployment. The large judgment surprised even Rubio's attorneys. "We did not ask for that much money," one of his lawyers told a legal journal. "The jury spoke loudly." It certainly did. The jury awarded the jumper- who reportedly suffered more than 50 broken bones in the accident- $150,000 in actualy damage, $1 million in past pain and suffering, $2 million for future pain and suffering, and $50 million in punitive damages. His wife recieved an award of $300,000 for loss of consortium. The punitive damages far exceed guidelines issued last year by the U.S. Supreme Court. SKYDIVING was unable to reach Rubio by telephone. The legal proceedings were unusual in that Precisions Aerodynamics did not participate in them. The Tennessee-based company didn't answer the complaint, nor did it attend the trial. "We tried an empty chair," on of Rubio's lawyers was quoted as saying. Precisions Aerodynamics president Geprge Galloway confirmed a report on the trial and its outcome, explaining his company did not have money to defend itself. Pretial legal fees in product-liability cases often run many of thousands of dollars. (Parachute manufactures Strong Enterprise spent more than $250,000 several years ago successfully defending itself from a lawsuit resulting from a tandeum accident.) Few parachute-equipment companies have produst-liability insurance. Rubio contended Precisions knew before his accident that this model of the Raven reserve was defective but didn't take any steps to remedy the situation. Galloway steadfastly denies that, pointing to the fact that the popular canopy meets TSO requirments and has deployed successfully, many, many emergencies. He also cited a hold-harmless agreement that he said Rubio signed. Like most sport parachutes, Precision reserves carry warning label that state they may malfunction even when packed and used properly, and that serious injuries and death may result from such malfunctions. What happens next isn't clear. Precisions Aerodynamics has nowhere near $53 million in assests, Galloway said. He said he's going to continue making parachutes- orders have picked up recently, he said. We all know the risk, Dangit! This crap really burns me... ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414 Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiveNFlorida 0 #2 January 7, 2004 If there is a label that says it may mal, then how can you sue? Yes, we all know the risks, but that is a serious malfunction there... i'm not sure where I stand on this. Just glad to have my pd reserve I suppose. Angela. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #3 January 7, 2004 *sigh* There's always someone on the playing field to ruin everyone elses fun. JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #4 January 7, 2004 Guess we'll soon have one less company to buy from.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masher 1 #5 January 7, 2004 QuoteIf there is a label that says it may mal, then how can you sue? In Oz, easily. AKAIK you can't sign away your rights to sue. Moves are afoot atm to allow people to sign away those rights for "hazardous" activities. This is in response to spiralling insurance premiums.-- Arching is overrated - Marlies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lizard 0 #6 January 7, 2004 I agree. This is just plain silly. People can and do get hurt jumping out of airplanes. If you think differently, you don't need to be jumping. Reminds me of the McDonald's/spilled coffee lawsuit. COFFEE IS HOT!!! be careful and use common sense if there is such a thing anymore. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #7 January 7, 2004 If anyone knows Rubio personally, please give him this message: FUCK OFF!!! FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laurel 0 #8 January 7, 2004 Rubio et. al. will never see that money........................................................................ PMS#28, Pelogrande Rodriguez#1074 My Pink M Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kai2k1 0 #9 January 7, 2004 I have a feeling that we have just seen the first of many judgements. It only takes one to open the proverbial "floodgates". I think its a bunch of bullshit personally!! There's no truer sense of flying than sky diving," Scott Cowan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #10 January 7, 2004 QuoteI agree. This is just plain silly. People can and do get hurt jumping out of airplanes. If you think differently, you don't need to be jumping. Reminds me of the McDonald's/spilled coffee lawsuit. COFFEE IS HOT!!! be careful and use common sense if there is such a thing anymore. Actually, that coffee wasn't just hot, it was almost boiling. That elderly lady required several surgeries for skin-grafts and had serious toxemia infections as well. But, this case against Precision does smack of an out of control jury and someone who is looking to place the blame. Sorry, unless someone is willfully reckless towards me, I subscribe to the theory of, "You buy your ticket, you take your chances."Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #11 January 7, 2004 QuoteIt only takes one to open the proverbial "floodgates". Unfortunately, there is much truth to this statement... JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #12 January 7, 2004 One more thing I almost forgot... there's a reason why skydiving manufacturer's aren't insured, and this is exactly it.Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ACMESkydiver 0 #13 January 7, 2004 I agree with you for the most part, Chile...but... What if I decide to begin production of skydiving equipment? I could do it. I could get the required licenses. I have a legitimate company that could market skydiving gear... ...and let's just suppose that I could increase my profit margin by 15% should I choose to use some sort of hardware that has in SOME cases been shown to break under heavy loads...however, it is legal to use...just not as good as, say, stainless steel.... then this marvelous widget that I have produced for the skydiving community fails for some reason on one rig...Ok, it's just 1 out of 400 that I've sold...however it broke under load, which I knew that it might do...and since I'm still within 'normal' operating parameters as far as incidents per item, I'm not going to worry about it.... Until Chile comes along and buys my marvelous widget...and you have a high-speed, spinning, crazy intense mal that my widget then breaks under the stress of, and you are left paralyzed. I try to say that you knew the risks and you bought my equipment with full knowledge that I had a 'hold harmless' agreement you had to sign on the order... I am NOT SAYING that this is the case at all in this particular incident or with this company...but would you still think that I didn't owe you damages if the situation I just described happened? I think as a company I would. There is a time and a place for lawsuits. I think lawsuits should be used as they were intended (as I see it anyhow...I'm not a legal person )...to indemnify someone that was wronged by someone else, and to prevent that person/company from hurting anyone else in the future in the same manner. Just my opinion, anyhow...but I do agree with you about frivolous lawsuits, Chile. PS I love your screen name. Yummmmmm...... ~Jaye Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lizard 0 #14 January 7, 2004 Other than the warning label on the canopy, is there anything the manufacturers' can do or are doing to protect themselves? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiveNFlorida 0 #15 January 7, 2004 QuoteRubio contended Precisions knew before his accident that this model of the Raven reserve was defective but didn't take any steps to remedy the situation. Galloway steadfastly denies that, pointing to the fact that the popular canopy meets TSO requirments and has deployed successfully, many, many emergencies. He also cited a hold-harmless agreement that he said Rubio signed. How would he know that they knew about defects? And, how do we know they didn't? Angela Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #16 January 7, 2004 How about partnering with the Mafia, so that those who bring these lawsuits never make it to trial. Hmm. FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #17 January 7, 2004 QuoteIf anyone knows Rubio personally, please give him this message: FUCK OFF!!! FallRate maybee his address is in my local phone book.. if so i will pay a personal visit to tell him to fuck off! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #18 January 7, 2004 Precision issued a SB shortly after a few incidents of the bartacks failing. They recalled a specific group of canopies. I am wondering if the canopy thats at the root of this lawsuit was even affected by the SB. If they have to pay, PA will go under and look for the rest of the industry to close ranks and start looking for ways to get out of the civilian manufactoring business.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #19 January 7, 2004 QuoteIf they have to pay, PA will go under and look for the rest of the industry to close ranks and start looking for ways to get out of the civilian manufactoring business. I really don't want to have to sew my own 'chute. Did I mention: Rubio can FUCK OFF!!! FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #20 January 7, 2004 QuotePrecision issued a SB shortly after a few incidents of the bartacks failing. They recalled a specific group of canopies. I am wondering if the canopy thats at the root of this lawsuit was even affected by the SB. The SB references 2 canopies that were loaded and deployed within limits that failed. This incident happened in November, the SB was released in December. Also, it was the type-III tape that was failing, leaving the bar tacks in place. The type-I tape wasn't/isn't failing. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #21 January 7, 2004 hey cool, I have a Dash-M... class action! I wonder if they jury put their pinky up to their lips "and we rule to award the plantiff... fifty million dollars..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #22 January 7, 2004 Is anyone aware of any precedent for a case like this? Has anyone sued equipment manufacturers with this much success before? Is yes, does anyone remember what happened? It would be nice to know if we will have to say goodbye to Precision. Also, runaway jury perhaps? Lawrocket? -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #23 January 7, 2004 With any sort of awarded amount you can bet the case will be appealed. Awarding something like the amount is real dumb, as you know the person/company that is supposed to pay it will simply declare bankruptcy and nobody gets anything. It is a sad state of affairs, but George won't end up paying that. He might close his doors....time will tell. Rubio is still a dumbfucker for doing this. He knew the risks and now wants someone else to pay for his error. Lowlife. And fuck his worm lawyer as well.JJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ACMESkydiver 0 #24 January 7, 2004 QuoteI wonder if they jury put their pinky up to their lips "and we rule to award the plantiff... fifty million dollars..." LMAO!!~Jaye Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GravityGirl 0 #25 January 7, 2004 QuoteGuess we'll soon have one less company to buy from. A manufacturer by any other name is still a manufacturer. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peace and Blue Skies! Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
