AZ Court Rejects Request For Dismissal Of Jabiru Aircraft Lawsuit | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

** AIRBORNE 05.21.13 Aero-TV-- CLICK HERE! ** HD iPad-Friendly Version -- AIRBORNE 05.21.13 **

** AIRBORNE 05.17.13 Aero-TV-- CLICK HERE! ** HD iPad-Friendly Version -- AIRBORNE 05.17.13 **

** AIRBORNE 04.01.13 SPECIAL EDITION of Aero-TV-- CLICK HERE! ** HD iPad-Friendly Version -- AIRBORNE 04.01.13 SPECIAL EDITION **

Tue, May 15, 2012

AZ Court Rejects Request For Dismissal Of Jabiru Aircraft Lawsuit

Says Australian Company Can Be Sued In The State Of Arizona

An Arizona court said it will allow a lawsuit against Australian kitplane manufacturer Jabiru Aircraft Company to go forward despite the fact that it's headquartered on the other side of the planet.

The Arizona state Court of Appeals said that because Jabiru clearly understood that its kits were being sold in the U.S. through a dealer and distribution network, the lawsuit could go forward in Arizona. The company is being used over an accident in 2008 in which the pilot was fatally injured.

The Arizona Daily sun reports that the family of pilot Gerald Van Heeswyk of Marana, AZ, said he had completed his kit, which was sold by Jabiru USA Sport Aircraft in Tennessee, in 2007. It was first flown by a a test pilot hired by Van Heeswyk after it had passed its inspections, and then for several hours by the owner/builder. But during a flight on June 1st 2008, the propeller came off the airplane and it went down, resulting in the fatal injury.

Jabiru has no employees in Arizona, and a trial judge initially ruled that the state had no jurisdiction in the case. Jabiru's lawyers argued that the company's liability ended when the distribute received the engine in Tennessee, and that it had no way to know that it would wind up in Arizona. But the appeals court pointed out that the company had sold 61 products in Arizona the year Van Heeswyk bought his kit, including five engines, and that it was part of a "stream of products" that were specifically exported to final destinations in Arizona. Sales in the state amounted to 2 percent of the company's overall sales in that year.

In the ruling written by judge Garye Vasquez for the panel that it could not ignore the fact that the Australian company receives the "bulk of the economic benefit from its sales in 'distant forums' such as Arizona."

FMI: http://azcourts.gov/AZCourts/CourtofAppeals.aspx

Advertisement

More News

X-47B Accomplishes Its First Ever Carrier Touch And Go

Maneuver Performed Aboard CVN 77 The Navy's X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstrator (UCAS-D) began touch and go landing operations aboard the aircraft carrier USS George H.W.>[...]

Honeywell's New HTF7350 Engine To Power Bombardier Challenger 350

HTF7000 Series Surpasses 1.5 Million Flight Hours With Better Than 99 Percent Dispatch Reliability Honeywell has announced that its HTF7350, the latest engine to join its successfu>[...]

Airborne 05.21.13: Cirrus Chute Fails, NASA Record, More NIMBY Nonsense

Also: PC-12 Record, Maule Nation, Cockpit Lockout, 34,000 Airliners Needed, Beechcraft Wins Big Contract You know you're having a bad day when a flight goes so bad that you feel yo>[...]

Helo Crew Missing From Vietnam War Accounted For, Interred At Arlington

Four Buried As A Group May 2 A Navy Pilot, missing from the Vietnam War, has been accounted-for and was buried with full military honors along with his crew. According to the Depar>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.21.13)

Forest Service Smoke Jumpers Smokejumping was first proposed in 1934 by T.V. Pearson, the Forest Service Intermountain Regional Forester, as a means to quickly provide initial atta>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2013 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC