Lower Court Excluded Certain Evidence That Led To Judgment In Favor Of The Planemaker

The Second Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court's jury finding in favor of Cirrus Design Corporation in a case stemming from an accident that fatally injured New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle and flight instructor Tyler Stanger in 2006. The two were aboard a Cirrus SR20 that Lidle had recently purchased. The airplane impacted an apartment building in New York City while attempting a turn over New York’s East River.

According to court documents, the plaintiffs ... the families of Lidle and Stanger, did not prove that the lower court should have allowed evidence from an accident involving a similar aircraft in March of that year. The appeals court agreed with the lower court that the circumstances of the accidents were not sufficiently similar.

The Aviation Law Monitor reports that the families also said that the trial judge was in error for excluding an AD published in 2008 mandating adjustments to the rudder-aileron interconnect on all Cirrus aircraft. But the appeals court ruled that the trial judge had acted properly. If the 2008 AD had been allowed as evidence, it would have opened the door for Cirrus to enter a 2007 service bulletin into evidence that was included as a reference in the AD, which is prohibited by law. The trial judge had said that allowing such evidence might "discourage manufacturers from issuing service bulletins as part of voluntary compliance procedures."

The appeals court ruling is expected to be the final word in this case.

(SR20 image from file. Not accident airplane)

FMI: Full Ruling