"Lad" Doctor Awarded $1.25 Million

The accident was the lowlight of Oshkosh in 1999: a formation flight of Navy Warbirds tangled up on takeoff. The Corsair pilot, in the #3 spot, Laird "Lad" Doctor, chewed up the wing of leader Howard Pardue's Bearcat. Doctor got by far the worst of it: his plane burned up, and he suffered severe spinal injuries, rendering him a paraplegic.

The NTSB assigned fault to Doctor, with mention of communications confusion and possible mistakes by a volunteer air boss. We'd urge you to read the report.

Anyway, a Texas jury made the award, assigning exactly 50% of the blame to Doctor, and the other quarters each to the EAA and Pardue. [If any more than half the blame were determined to have been Doctor's, he would have been ineligible to collect anything, we're told --ed.] Whether the award will be appealed is still in the air, so to speak. Because of limits on awards that certain organizations can be held liable for (Texas, where the suit was brought, has statutory limits on such awards), the EAA's insurance company would pay $500,000, and Pardue's would pay $625,000.

Here's what the EAA has said, for the record:

LAIRD DOCTOR AND LINDA DOCTOR V. EAA AND HOWARD PARDUE
On July 29, 1999, Laird Doctor, a highly experienced pilot, was piloting a Corsair, a World War II-type aircraft, as part of the air show during the EAA AirVenture convention. Doctor was participating as part of a Navy flight of eight aircraft when he took off prematurely and struck the aircraft operated by the flight leader, Howard Pardue, who was stopped on the runway in front of him. The only injuries were to Laird Doctor, who was rendered a quadriplegic, as a result of the accident.

Laird and Linda Doctor filed a lawsuit in Houston (Harris County, Texas) against Howard Pardue, the flight leader, and subsequently, Experimental Aircraft Association. On June 16, 2003, the case proceeded to trial before a jury in Harris County, Texas, which returned a verdict favorable to the EAA.

During the closing arguments on Wednesday, July 2nd, the plaintiffs' counsel asked the jury to find Howard Pardue 75% responsible and EAA 25% responsible, and further asked the jury for a verdict of $50 million. If Laird Doctor was found 51% or more responsible, he and Linda Doctor would have been barred from any recovery.

The jury found that all parties (EAA, Pardue, Doctor) were responsible and that Laird Doctor's negligence was twice that of either the EAA or Mr. Pardue. The degree of responsibility found by the jury was as follows: Laird Doctor-50%; EAA-25%; Howard Pardue-25%.

Although the EAA believes that the accident was solely the responsibility of Laird Doctor, as determined by the National Transportation Safety Board, the EAA is pleased with the jury finding that the majority of the responsibility was with Laird Doctor and that the jury recognized the charitable nature of the EAA, despite the obvious sympathy which the jury must have felt for Mr. Doctor because of his condition. Additionally, the evidence showed in the case that Mr. Doctor was receiving excellent medical care through the Worker's Compensation carrier for his employer.

In Texas, organizations found to be a charitable organization under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3) have a cap of $500,000 as a maximum limit of its damages. The jury found that EAA was a charitable organization and found that Howard Pardue was its volunteer. Although no judgment has been rendered, the EAA believes that the maximum that the EAA would be expected to pay is $500,000. Howard Pardue believes he will be obligated to pay no damages.

FMI: www.eaa.org